US missile support for Ukraine 'too little too late', Scottish expert says as Kremlin responds to decision
A Scottish expert has claimed the US granting Kyiv permission to strike targets in Russia with allied weapons has come “too little, too late”.
Joe Biden has allowed Ukraine to use US-supplied weapons to strike sites in Russia after months of pressure from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad

The Kremlin has responded with a warning that the move adds “fuel to the fire” of the war and would escalate international tensions even higher.
Professor Luke March, personal chair of Post-Soviet and Comparative Politics at the University of Edinburgh, welcomed the decision, but suggested unless it was carried out long-term, it would make little difference.
It comes as Downing Street said Ukraine must be in the strongest possible position, insisting it will “double down” on support, fuelling speculation that British-supplied missiles could be used by Kyiv’s forces to hit targets deep inside Russia.
The UK Government has previously been reluctant to give Ukraine permission without a shift in US policy, in part because the missiles use American navigation data.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdSpeaking to The Scotsman, Professor March said: “I think it’s welcome but too little, too late. Ukraine has been fighting with hands effectively tied for a while – Russia has been able to launch drone attacks and ground offensives largely with impunity for a while, and this at least gives Ukraine the opportunity to hit reserves, arms and personnel build-up more effectively.
“It’s also (as far as I understand it) specifically aimed at the potential build-up of North Korean and Russian troops aiming to retake Kursk. To the degree Russia is trying to leverage as much territory as possible before Trump is inaugurated, it might slow that process and cause a partial rethink. It is also clearly trying to make a fait accompli that he (T) might find it difficult to renege on.
“However, unless it is a policy that is carried out consistently in the months going forward, with a regular (re)supply of weapons, it’s not going to majorly affect the balance of the war, which has been tipping towards Russia’s advantage. Both sides are trying to maximise their position before any potential peace agreement.
“We don’t know exactly what Trump is going to do, and any peace agreement in the coming months will be both extremely difficult to reach and likely not lasting (because of each side’s incompatible objectives and Russia’s intention to permanently weaken/dismember Ukraine), so in the longer context of the war this doesn’t change much (yet).”
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe outgoing US president’s decision could see long-range missiles used initially in the Kursk region, where Ukrainian troops have launched an incursion into Russian territory and President Vladimir Putin has bolstered his defences with troops from North Korea.
Downing Street said the UK Government wanted to put Ukraine in the “strongest possible position going into the winter to defend its sovereign territory”.
The UK will “double down” to ensure Ukraine is “provided with the support that it needs for as long as it needs”, a No 10 spokeswoman said, though she refused to say whether that would include allowing Storm Shadow missiles to be fired at targets in Russia.
“Our support in Ukraine is ironclad and will continue on that basis. But as to the specifics of the support that we provide … we won’t get into speculation or a commentary on operational discussions.
“It also remains the case that no war was ever won with one single piece of kit,” she said.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.