three questions to General Trinquand on Ukraine’s use of Western weapons on Russian territory

Ukraine is asking to take a new step in its fight against Russia: launching Western missiles on targets on Russian territory to prevent the departure of planes or missiles. A strategy that divides within the countries that support Ukraine. General Dominique Trinquand explains these different positions.

Emmanuel Macron declared himself in favor of the use of Western missiles by the Ukrainian army to neutralize military sites in Russia. This position is not shared by the United States and Germany, in particular, who remain opposed to it. Ukraine pleads the right to self-defense and explains that it must strike Russian soil from a greater distance, because its army knows where the missiles and combat planes are launched from and could destroy them before the strikes.

General Dominique Trinquand, former head of the French military mission to the UN, author of What awaits usanalyzes these different positions.

Franceinfo: How to interpret the gap in position between France and some of its allies, including the United States?

Dominique Trinquand : For Europeans, this war is existential. It is not for the United States, which is taking a step back. Plus, they’re in an election period, so it’s complicated.

France’s position is a realistic one. We cannot give weapons and ask not to use them. We can issue restrictions, meaning that of course, they obey the laws of war and only strike military targets. The United States’ position is a little different because, since the start of the war, they have been afraid of facing Russia. And since they have a bad perception of what Putin could do, they are a little afraid of their shadow. As for the other Europeans, I believe that the British are in the same position as the French and they are the only ones who provide long-range weapons.

I would like to recall that on February 24, 2022, when Russia attacked Ukraine, the first reaction of the Americans was to withdraw their embassy, ​​their advisers, ask Zelensky if he wanted to come with them. That is to say that they did not want this war at all, contrary to what the pro-Putin propaganda says. They are in and they are going in with great caution, even if there are considerable resources, particularly in the area of ​​armaments, which are helping Ukraine. But in the American administration, opinions diverge: Mr. Blinken is not at all in the same position as Mr. Biden.

Should we see a fear of Vladimir Putin’s reaction and a “permanent escalation”?

This fear has existed for two years and each time, we have pushed the limits. The Russians have already been saying for two weeks that there are ATACMS (American long-range missiles) hitting Russian territory. Is this true or not? I don’t think that’s true, but the fact that they announce it indicates that they accept it in a certain way. So I don’t understand why we continue to have these fears.

From the start, Putin has been strong in our weaknesses and it is a matter of stopping this slide from weakness. I will repeat the words of Pope John Paul II: “Do not be afraid”. And this is the position we should have had for two and a half years because Putin only speaks and escalates with words. Has Putin escalated against the West? Never ! Oh yes, on social networks, with cyberattacks, but concretely, with weapons, never.

Is it an obligation for Ukraine to target Russian military sites, in particular sites that allow Russia to send its missiles to Ukraine?

Ukraine has been striking Russian territory for a long time. It strikes on strategic interests, in particular refineries, to cut off some of the fuel for the Russian army. We also saw a radar that was hit, which was 1,800 kilometers from the Ukrainian border, so they’re doing quite well. And they have to keep hitting, especially at the logistics sites behind Belgorod and the PCs. But the missiles are often launched by planes from Russian territory. So at that point it’s a matter of striking air bases, which Ukraine has already done.