Follow us on social

google cta
Not leaving empty handed: Zelensky gets his ATACMs

Not leaving empty handed: Zelensky gets his ATACMs

But they may not be the game changer he wanted

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

So it looks like Ukrainian President Zelensky did not leave Washington empty handed this week after all. According to reports this afternoon, the Biden administration has relented and will transfer long range ATACMs, long considered too escalatory for the conflict, to Ukraine in the “upcoming weeks,” according to POLITICO.

The ATACMs variant that the U.S. is reportedly considering, according to the Washington Post (which, unlike POLITICO says the administration is "nearing an announcement") uses controversial cluster munitions, another old "red line" for the administration in this war, instead of a single warhead. This is not exactly what the Ukrainians had hoped for.

"You don't take out big, high-value targets with cluster munitions," points out my colleague George Beebe, QI's Director of Grand Strategy. "(These ATACMs) might complicate things well behind Russian front lines, causing the Russians to have to move some supply depots and worry a bit more about supply lines. But even then, nothing close to a game-changer. Russia can and will adjust."

It is interesting, nonetheless, that Biden waited until after Zelensky was out of town, away from microphones and safely ensconced in meetings in Canada before allowing his people to drop this bombshell (pun intended). That’s a typical Friday in Washington — save your potentially controversial news for Friday afternoon.

According to POLITICO, Biden made the pledge behind closed doors Thursday and two unnamed officials tipped off the press today :

President Joe Biden promised his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, that the United States will soon provide Kyiv with a small number of long-range missiles to help its war with Russia, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

Biden made the pledge to Zelenskyy during the Ukrainian leader’s visit to the White House on Thursday, fulfilling a long-held wish by Kyiv, according to the officials who like others for this story were granted anonymity to speak about private conversations.

Ukraine, for all obvious reasons, has wanted ATACMs (Army Tactical Missile Systems ) because they have a range of 190 miles which would allow its military to target Russian assets inside Russian territory, including Russia-occupied Crimea. Currently they have American HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems), which have a range of about 50 miles.

As my colleague, reporter Connor Echols pointed out in a story on Sept. 12 the HIMARs were once a “red line” for the Biden administration, which feared they would be too escalatory. The weapons were transferred nonetheless starting in June 2022. In July 2022, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan told reporters, at the suggestion that ATACMs would be next, that such a transfer would risk putting the U.S. and Russia on “the road towards a third world war.”

It’s clear now, after the Abrams tanks, another red line, and approving the transfer of F-16, another red line, from European partners to Ukraine, that the ATACMs were inevitable. The White House wants to give Ukrainians the best possible chance to fulfill the goals of its struggling counteroffensive.

While many say the move may only draw us closer to a direct conflict with Russia, others like Beebe say it would be more impactful if the ATACMs were fitted with unitary missiles, which would have improved Ukrainians' lethal capabilities considerably.

"Ukraine wanted a weapon with long-range strategic strike capability," he added. "They are getting instead a long-range anti-personnel weapon."


President Joe Biden and First Lady Dr. Jill Biden greet President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Mrs. Olena Zelenska of Ukraine at the South Portico of the White House. (Photo by Allison Bailey/NurPhoto)
google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Oil disruption from Iran war won’t end any time soon
REUTERS/Essam al-Sudani/File Photo

People walk near farmland by the Zubair oil field as gas flares rise in the distance, in Zubair Mishrif, Basra, Iraq, amid regional tensions following the recent disruption to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, March 9, 2026.

Oil disruption from Iran war won’t end any time soon

QiOSK

The US-Israel-Iran war has led to extraordinary volatility in global energy markets this week, and there is little reason to think that it will abate any time soon.

Benchmark Brent crude, which traded below $60 per barrel early this year, jumped to $80 last Thursday. It then bounced to $120 in thin weekend markets and, as of this writing, has settled in around $92. In other words, the range of the recent oil price has been 50% of where it was a mere five days ago.

keep readingShow less
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Ilham Aliyev azerbaijan iran
Top photo credit: Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev visited Embassy of Islamic Republic of Iran, offered condolences over death of former President Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, in 2017. (Office of the President of Azerbaijan/public domain)

Neocons wanted an Azeri uprising against Iran. They didn't get it.

Middle East

With Iran resisting the U.S./Israeli onslaught for the second week, what was supposed to be a quick transition to a pro-U.S. regime following the decapitation strike that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is fast turning into a quagmire. While the U.S. and Israel continue to sow mayhem on Tehran from the skies, the previously unthinkable option of sending ground troops to Iran is gaining ground.

First, an apparent plan was being hatched to employ Kurdish fighters to take on Tehran. Then, when drones, allegedly flying from Iran although Tehran denied it, struck the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan — hitting an airport terminal and a village school, and wounding four civilians — the stage appeared set for the opening of a northern front against Iran. Here was an alleged act of aggression from Iranian territory against Israel's closest partner in the South Caucasus. It offered the pretext to goad Azerbaijan into joining the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.