On September 19, MEPs will vote on a resolution calling on EU member states to lift restrictions and allow Ukraine to launch long-range Western missiles into Russian territory against “legitimate targets.”
The MEPs’ proposal argues that current restrictions hamper Ukraine’s right to self-defense, leaving the country vulnerable to further attacks. However, this measure not only marks a worrying step towards the escalation of the conflict, but also endangers global security by encouraging a spiral of violence with unpredictable consequences.
For example, we can wonder what would have happened if, during the Vietnam War, Russia had provided the North Vietnamese with missiles capable of hitting “legitimate targets” on American territory, for example to destroy air bases. B-52s which exterminated the civilian population or the napalm factories. Or the American barracks where the marines trained in cruel and brutal combat techniques.
The caution of the United States, Germany and Italy
Despite pressure to increase military support for Ukraine, US President Joe Biden has decided to maintain restrictions on the use of Western weapons systems for attacks on Russian territory. Joe Biden is aware that such an escalation would risk drawing the United States and its allies into direct conflict with Russia, a danger that any responsible leader must avoid. Mr. Biden said no to the use of American Atacms missiles against military bases in Russia.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz also took a similar position, clearly expressing his refusal to support Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory, as they could lead to a dangerous escalation of the conflict. Germany, as a member of the European Union, continues to seek a delicate balance between support for Ukraine and the need to avoid open war between NATO and Russia. Germany refuses to give the green light to German-made Taurus missiles.
The Greens and the Taurus missiles
However, on behalf of the Green group in the European parliament, a resolution was tabled to provide Taurus missiles (manufactured by Germany and Sweden) capable of hitting Moscow. Please note: in January 2024, the German parliament voted against the supply of Taurus missiles to Ukraine. The request for the supply of Taurus missiles was included in the joint resolution proposal to be voted on by the different groups in the European Parliament.
In Italy, Defense Minister Guido Crosetto and Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani reiterated the same principle. Indeed, the Storm Shadow missiles are equipped with the target search system patented by the Italian company Leonardo. Italy, also because of its Constitution, favors a strategy that avoids any direct escalation with Russia, maintaining a line of diplomatic and military caution.
Direct military involvement of the West
One of the most dangerous aspects of the proposal to lift restrictions on the use of Western weapons systems is that many of the long-range missiles requested by Ukraine, such as the Storm Shadowrequire the American satellite network and the direct involvement of NATO military personnel. These missiles are equipped with the system M-codean advanced encrypted technology that allows you to hit targets precisely while avoiding interference from Russian electronic countermeasures. However, Ukraine does not have direct access to this M-code system: the launch and control of these missiles therefore require the active intervention of NATO personnel. Many MEPs do not know these military details, which are nevertheless very important for making an informed choice and not a gamble.
Putin threatens to retaliate
This fact raises serious implications: allowing the use of such missiles against targets on Russian territory would mean direct involvement of the West in Ukrainian military operations. This is why Vladimir Putin threatened to retaliaterecognizing that such an act would amount to total intervention by the United States and NATO in bombing operations against Russia. Such an escalation risks transforming a regional conflict into a direct confrontation between world powers, with the involvement of nuclear weapons a possible end scenario.
The risk of escalation
The proposal to lift restrictions does not take into account the risk of escalation. Attacking targets inside Russia could indeed trigger an increasingly dangerous endless spiral. International law, while enshrining the right to self-defense, must always be interpreted keeping in mind the need to avoid uncontrolled escalation. The idea of directly striking targets on Russian territory goes against any logic of de-escalation and peaceful negotiation, which should on the contrary be the absolute priority.
Fueling the spiral of war?
History has taught us that long-term wars often turn into needless carnage, where human and material losses far outweigh strategic gains. We recently learned that the war in Ukraine has already left a million dead and wounded. Increasing the level of violence, without seeking concrete diplomatic solutions, not only prolongs the suffering of the Ukrainian people, but also endangers the stability of the entire region.
A Europe that is moving away from its principles of peace
The European Union was born as a peace project, based on cooperation and dialogue between nations, on a continent which experienced the ravages of two world wars. The proposed resolution appears to deviate from these fundamental principles, pushing Europe to take an active role in a conflict that could easily spiral out of control. If the EU becomes part of an armed conflict directed against a nuclear power, it risks betraying its own mission of building peace and stability.
Note : Resolution of the European Parliament on the continuation of financial and military support of EU Member States to Ukraine
(2024/2799(RSP)) The European Parliament
(…)
“Calls on Member States to immediately lift restrictions on the use of Western weapons systems delivered to Ukraine against legitimate military targets on Russian territory, as this hinders Ukraine’s ability to fully exercise its right to self-defense under public international law and leaves Ukraine exposed to attacks on its population and infrastructure.”
Resolution proposed by:
Michael Gahler, Andrzej Halicki, Sebastião Bugalho, David McAllister, Siegfried Muresan, zeljana Zovko, Andrius Kubilius, Pekka Toveri, Rasa Juknevičienė, Isabel Wiseler‐Lima, Antonio López‐Istúriz White, Nicolás Pascual De La Parte, Mika Aaltola, Wouter Beke, Gheorghe Falcă, Niclas Herbst, Sandra Kalniete, Marcin Kierwiński, Łukasz Kohut, Ondřej Kolář, Vangelis Meimarakis, Danuše Nerudova, Ana Miguel Pedro, Hélder Sousa Silva, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Szczerba, Alice Teodorescu Måwe, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Riho Terras, Matej Tonin, Inese Vaidere
on behalf of the Parti Populaire Europe group.
Sven Mikser, Yannis Maniatis.
on behalf of the S&D Group (socialists and democrats).
Aurelijus Veryga, Adam Bielan, Mariusz Kamiński, Tobiasz Bocheński, Roberts Zīle, Michał Dworczyk, Veronika Vrecionová, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Ondřej Krutílek, Reinis Pozņaks, Rihards Kols, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Małgorzata Gosiewska, Assita Kanko
on behalf of the ECR group (European Conservatives and Reformists).
Helmut Brandstätter, Petras Auštrevičius, Dan Barna, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Bart Groothuis, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvashová, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Nathalie Loiseau, Urmas Paet, Eugen Tomac, Hilde Vautmans, Lucia Yar, Daini Ž Dainius
on behalf of the Renew Group (liberal).
Sergey Lagodinsky, Markéta Gregorová
on behalf of the Green Group.
Hanna Gedin (Swedish Left Party), Jonas Sjöstedt (Chairman of the Swedish Left Party), Li Andersson (Left Alliance, Finland), Jussi Saramo (Left Alliance, Finland), Merja Kyllönen (Left Alliance, Finland),
on behalf of Clausen (Red-Green Alliance, Norway).
