We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
File Photo: The South Korea and U.S. alliance fired eight combined surface-to-surface missiles ATACMS into the East Sea in response to North Korea multiple ballistic missile (SRBM) provocation from around 4:45 p.m on June 6, 2022.
Did the Ukrainians just use ATACMS?
Ukrainian officials have pleaded with Washington for months to provide its military with so-called Army Tactical Missile Systems, widely known as ATACMS, to hit important Russian targets deep behind enemy lines. It appears the US has now sent a small number of these missiles – and Ukraine claims that it used them on the battlefield on Tuesday to big effect. Its Special Operations Forces say they destroyed nine Russian helicopters, an air defense launcher, and an ammunition depot, with multiple Russian casualties.
Were the weapons they used the sought-after ATACMS? Ukraine isn’t saying, though President Volodymyr Zelensky dropped some not-so-subtle hints following the strike. “I thank those who are destroying at scale the logistics and bases of the occupiers of our land. We have results,” Zelensky said Tuesday. “I thank certain partners of ours: effective weapons, just as we agreed.”
Zelensky has every reason to talk up Ukrainian successes. The counteroffensive has so far fallen well short of the hopes and expectations of allies. The crisis in Israel has distracted the US and Europe and may require military resources that might have gone to Ukraine. Some hard-right Republicans in the US have called for a halt to US help for Kyiv.
It’s also likely that the missiles used in this case were an older version of ATACMS that lack the range of the more modern weapons Ukraine is still hoping for. Most targets inside Crimea, for example, remain out of reach for now.
But this attack reminds us that Washington remains Ukraine’s ally, Ukraine’s military remains a potent fighting force, and much still happens behind the scenes that we become aware of only when something large explodes.
Ukraine's outgoing Minister of Defence of Ukraine Oleksii Reznikov at a briefing earlier this year.
A changing of the guard in Ukraine
Citing a need for “new approaches” in the war with Russia, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky named a new defense minister: Rustem Umerov, head of Ukraine's State Property Fund. Umerov replaces Oleksii Reznikov, who Zelensky noted “has gone through more than 550 days of full-scale war.” Prior to the appointment, which must be ratified by Parliament, Umerov was closely involved in prisoner-of-war exchanges and served as a senior negotiator in the now-suspended Black Sea Grain Initiative.
The change comes at a pivotal moment in the 19-month war, as Ukraine attempts to accelerate training and procure needed weapons to bolster its counteroffensive. It also comes after a number of corruption scandals rocked the Ukrainian defense ministry, prompting Zelensky to clean house to maintain the confidence of Western allies. In January, he sacked a host of officials, and in early August he fired all regional military commissioners.
Umerov represents the opposition Golos Party and is a Crimean Tatar, a member of the Muslim minority persecuted by Russia. While he has limited defense experience, his strong background in business is seen as an advantage as Ukraine ramps up its military capabilities and absorbs billions of dollars of international aid. Umerov’s appointment is the latest change designed to show that the Ukrainian government can be trusted to manage that Western support – and keep it coming.
Is NATO evolving fast enough to adapt to an ever-changing world?
How does NATO's Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg think his organization should adapt to a rapidly changing world? "The most important thing we can do is to make sure that we have strong international institutions. And that NATO remains a strong alliance, both militarily and politically." The fact that Stoltenberg stressed the importance of political evolution for a military alliance like NATO may indicate how much the modern battlefield has changed since the fall of the Berlin Wall. He spoke with Ian Bremmer on an episode of GZERO World.
Watch the full episode: Will NATO adapt to emerging global threats?