Ukraine needs much more than just ATACMS to fight Russia

President Joe Biden’s administration will “do everything possible” during its remaining term in office to help Ukraine “fight through 2025” and achieve “a position of strength” in possible peace talks, Secretary of State Antony Blinken promised Tuesday. The government has recently taken some important steps in this direction, including authorizing missile strikes in Russia.

But Biden – and Congress – can do more by January 20th.

Although Ukrainian soldiers continue to fight hard, the war is moving in a worrying direction. Russia’s rate of progress, while still relatively modest, has accelerated every month since June. Russian troops are now conquering an average of over 20 square kilometers per day, the fastest pace since 2022. Even more worrying than these territorial gains themselves are what they say about the state of the Ukrainian armed forces. A shortage of manpower, particularly infantry, is increasingly straining Ukraine’s defense. Kyiv is losing soldiers faster than it can replace them. The country’s mobilization rate has fallen, and too many undertrained soldiers are suffering casualties or disappearing.

Meanwhile, as temperatures plummet, Moscow has renewed its efforts to destroy Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, already decimated by previous missile and drone attacks. This winter will probably be the harshest that Ukraine has experienced so far. In a pessimistic scenario, severe power outages could trigger another refugee crisis.

Vladimir Putin appears to be betting that he can wear down Ukraine enough to impose maximalist peace terms. The conditions demanded by the Kremlin would limit Ukraine’s geopolitical autonomy and leave the country vulnerable to future Russian aggression. Although Russia’s military and economy also face growing challenges, there are concerns that Ukrainian lines will break before the Russians run out of strength.

A related challenge is uncertainty about future U.S. aid to Ukraine under President-elect Donald Trump, who wants to negotiate a quick peace deal. While he is unlikely to cut off aid entirely, a cut is possible, perhaps in an ill-conceived attempt to pressure Kiev into concessions. Moscow likely hopes that its threats of escalation will encourage the new government to be more cautious in supporting Ukraine and open to Russian conditions.

Against this backdrop, the Biden administration has made some important decisions in recent weeks and months to better position Ukraine for next year. In late September, Biden directed the Pentagon to “increase” the remaining congressional support for Kyiv before he leaves office. In particular, the president promised an additional Patriot air defense battery to help Ukraine defend against Russian missile attacks.

Earlier this month, the government allowed American contractors to maintain and repair military equipment in Ukraine, accelerating its return to service. In addition, Biden decided to give Kiev anti-personnel mines to stop the creeping Russian infantry attacks.

And finally, Biden eased restrictions on Ukrainian attacks in Russia with US-provided ATACMS missiles. London, in turn, has also authorized attacks inside Russia with Storm Shadow missiles supplied by Great Britain. Officials hope these strikes will help Ukraine hold onto territory captured last August in Russia’s Kursk region and deter North Korea from sending additional troops to fight for Russia. Ukraine has wasted no time in attacking key targets in and around the Kursk region.

Although these recent US decisions are belated, they can make a positive contribution to the fight. Although Kiev’s labor shortage is the biggest problem, increased Western aid can help offset this weakness and reduce Ukraine’s casualty rate.

But Biden shouldn’t stop there. A lot can still be done before the end of his term.

First of all, Kiev will need more missiles to take full advantage of Russia’s new offensive policy. Ukraine’s missile stocks are relatively small and some of them are intercepted by Russia. Although the Pentagon says it cannot spare many more ATACMS, the United States could provide other munitions, such as JASSM air-launched cruise missiles, an option the administration has reportedly considered. JASSM has a greater range than ATACMS and is available in greater numbers. At the same time, the Pentagon could place a major order for new ATACMS production for Ukraine and then move it to the front of the queue – something the administration has reportedly rejected.

BM-21 is attacked by Ukrainian drone

Additionally, providing more artillery ammunition would reduce the burden on Ukrainian infantry. While Ukraine is relying on first-person attack drones to make up for manpower and artillery shortages, these drones are not a panacea. U.S. production of 155mm artillery shells is expected to double to 100,000 rounds per month by summer 2025, allowing for larger shipments to Kyiv. But Ukraine needs this ammunition now, not later.

Washington should pressure South Korea, a major manufacturer of artillery ammunition, to consider supplying additional shells to Ukraine indirectly through the United States, as Seoul did early in the war. The Pentagon should also consider bringing forward U.S. supplies by temporarily dipping a little deeper into its existing stockpiles, assuming the difference can soon be made up thanks to upcoming production increases. This could allow Ukraine to fire larger quantities when they are needed most. This would help hedge against a possible cut in US aid under Trump.

In addition to ammunition, Kiev needs more armored vehicles and other equipment to replace losses and equip new and existing units. The Biden administration has pledged a significant number of vehicles in recent months — albeit mostly Humvees — and should continue that trend. Many Ukrainian units remain inadequately equipped. Closing this gap would improve their combat capability and help reduce casualties. Ideally, these additional deliveries will include additional Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, which have proven themselves excellently in Ukraine. But less glamorous equipment would also be useful, such as aging M113 armored personnel carriers, thousands of which are in long-term storage.

Finally, Congress must do its part. Biden has asked lawmakers to include additional Ukraine-related funding in the short-term budget bill currently being discussed. This funding would help ensure Washington can continue to support Kyiv through the end of the next fiscal year. Bipartisan support would send a strong signal to the Kremlin of U.S. resolve.

About the Author: John Hardie

John Hardie is deputy director of FDD’s Russia program. His research focuses on Russian foreign and security policy, US policy towards Russia and the post-Soviet region, and transatlantic relations. His name has appeared in publications such as Foreign Policy, Defense News, The National Interest and C4ISRNET. John holds an MA in Security Studies from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and a bachelor’s degree in international relations, political science and psychology from the University of Georgia.