> this is stated in the russian offensive campaign assessment by the institute for the study of war (isw) as of september 27, 2024, the ukraine's news agency reports. > "russian authorities appear to be expending a significant amount of effort to influence the western debate about allowing the ukraine to use western-provided weapons to conduct long-range strikes against military objects in russia. this russian effort suggests a deep concern with the operational pressures that such strikes into russia would generate on russian offensive operations in the ukraine, although us officials remain hesitant to permit the ukraine to conduct such strikes," the daily review said. > the new york times (nyt), citing sources, reported that u.s. intelligence estimates "play down" the effect that the ukraine's strikes on russia from long-range missile systems provided by the u.s., uk and france could have on the course of the war in the ukraine, due to the limited number of such weapons in the ukraine and the uncertainty regarding the future provision of more long-range systems. > "russian authorities are likely concerned about how moving ammunition depots and other critical storage facilities further away from the frontline and outside the range of western-provided systems will impact russian offensive capabilities in the ukraine and appear to be engaged in a significant rhetorical effort to prevent the west from allowing the ukraine to conduct another similarly significant strike campaign, the isw post said. > "the benefits of allowing the ukraine to use western-provided long-range strike systems against russia may outweigh the risk of russian retaliation more than western policymakers are currently considering," the report said. like the other wunderwaffels, i guess...
Germany