this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Ukraine
8073 readers
32 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants in any form is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem with these long range Standoff munitions is that they're sorely needed in the indo-pacific region if there's ever a war with China. (Likely to be within the next few years) It's going to give some pause to US planners as range is at a premium there. I don't see JASSM going to Ukraine myself, as these missiles are reserved for a fight with China. However, it may be a useful move to get Europe to chip in for long range munitions.
Getting to do some real world test in russia before actually needing them in china is probably not a bad idea.
Even if Ukraine only received and used a pair of these missiles, Russia would have to react to the possibility that Ukraine received many many more. This could be a positive development for UA ground forces just like we're seeing TU-92 and TU-22 being operated at more distant airbases and Sevestapol being emptied in favor of Novorossiysk.
I haven't read any expert discussion, but I am wondering if that will be such a problem. That was an issue for ATACMS, but:
PrSM, which I understand to be the ATACMS replacement, was subsequently accepted by the Army.
https://www.twz.com/one-argument-against-giving-atacms-to-ukraine-is-about-to-erode
It sounds like we've also ramped up ATACMS production since then.
https://breakingdefense.com/2024/04/sullivan-says-ukraine-supplemental-should-cover-all-of-2024-long-range-atacms-now-in-ukraine/
In the case of JASSM, it's not ramping up production of a weapon with a large stockpile relative to production rate and limited production that's on the edge of being phased out, but a new weapon (well, in the case of the -ER variant); I'd guess that it's probably less painful to increase the rate of production if we need more for China.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/2024/ramping-up--lockheed-martin-steadily-increasing-production-o.html
https://www.twz.com/air/jassm-stealth-cruise-missiles-now-on-the-table-for-ukraine-report
I mean, the "Arsenal of Democracy" rhetoric reminiscent of World War II is, I think, a bit overheated -- as I've pointed out before, if the US allocated a comparable level of GDP to military production to what it did in World War II, it could support hundreds of concurrent conflicts at the scale it is of the Russo-Ukrainian War. 2024 isn't 1944. But capacity has indeed been coming online; it's not static.