US-Supplied ATACMS Hit Russia: Who Pays for Washington's Escalation?
The Hill reports the Kremlin's accusation that Ukraine fired US-made ATACMS missiles at a southern Russian city. This is framed as a standalone 'accusation,' rather than the foreseeable consequence of the Biden administration's stated policy of supplying longer-range weaponry. This 'news' omits the $60 billion in military assistance provided to Ukraine by the US, a figure that continues to grow
while domestic programs face cuts. One might wonder if the concern about escalation only begins when Russia responds, not when the US provides the means to strike. Weapons transfers, like the ATACMS missiles in question, aren't neutral acts; they are direct interventions. The US has moved from 'defensive' aid to providing offensive capabilities, a decision that conveniently boosts the weapons
industry while extending a conflict with devastating human and economic costs. It appears 'defensive aid' now includes firing into Russian territory. How many steps towards direct conflict is the American public expected to applaud?