U.S. Is Giving Russia 'Sanctuary' From Long-Range Strikes: Ex-U.S. General

A former U.S. military official is questioning why the United States is allowing Russia to fire missiles into Ukraine seemingly at will.

Retired U.S. Army Commanding General Ben Hodges made the comment in relation to a Russian attack on Thursday that reportedly involved 9K720 Iskander short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs). Following the attack, Russia's Ministry of Defense pledged that it will "never" run out of Kalibr missiles.

Retired SEAL Team Six squadron leader Chuck Pfarrer tweeted that the SRBMs were launched from Russian-occupied areas inside Ukraine and targeted nearby cities. The missiles originated in Russia and can travel up to 500 kilometers—or 310 miles.

"Why do we allow Russia to fire from sanctuary?" Hodges tweeted on Friday. "By not providing ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile Systems), F16's and other long-range strike capabilities to UKR, we have in effect granted sanctuary to Russia which is able to kill innocent civilians in Ukraine without fear of consequences. Undefendable policy."

In an announcement aligned with the recent visit of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to Washington, U.S. officials confirmed that Patriot air defense systems will eventually be shipped to Ukraine. The Patriot missile battery, described as a potential game-changing defense system, is able to intercept Iskander missiles and other air attacks launched on behalf of the Russian military.

Ukraine's air defense was again on display on Friday morning. Ukrainian officials said its air force shot down 16 Iranian-made Shahed-136 drones, causing air raid alerts indicating for residents in the Kyiv, Cherkasy and Kirovohrad regions to take shelter.

Russian expert Dmitry Gorenburg of the Center for Naval Analyses (CNA) echoed recent statements made by retired U.S. Army Major John Spencer: Russia is in "very big trouble" heading into 2023 due to a lack of supplies and manpower.

Gorenburg told Newsweek Ukraine's victory could come quicker if the West did provide additional weapons, instead of "deterring itself because of phantom fears that Russia would somehow escalate if Ukraine were given certain kinds of offensive weapons."

"I agree that Russia is highly unlikely to succeed at any kind of advance this spring—or anytime in 2023, for that matter," Gorenburg said. "I am somewhat less confident, however, that Russia lacks the manpower and supplies to last past next summer.

"I think that it has both the manpower and the ammunition to sustain the war for the long term (several years), even if Ukraine slowly pushes forward and continues to liberate some of its territory," he continued.

Holding onto Ukrainian territory has "in essence redefined success" for Russian leaders, he added, so Western military assistance could prove fruitful for the liberation of that annexed territory.

Henry Hale, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, told Newsweek "that Russia has surprised us before" and can muster additional resources even while plagued by Western sanctions.

However, he admits Putin remains "in a tough spot."

"I do think Ukrainians have the edge and that the keys are troop morale and broad, deep public backing for the military effort," Hale said. "Putin may want to throw his young men into the meat grinder to fend off Ukrainian advances, but a major escalation in military conscription comes with risks—especially when the cause is not one that most Russians feel they and their loved ones should die for."

Such risks include poorly-trained draftees or conscripted soldiers that simply don't want to partake in the war effort and may desert the operation altogether. That could result in additional revolt against the Russian government while threatening the Kremlin's hold on power, Hale added.

Newsweek reached out to the Ukrainian and Russian defense ministries for comment.