By Rostyslav Averchuk
Lviv, Jan 10 (EFE).- Ukrainians expect foreign partners to remain committed to the planned security guarantees despite Russia’s demonstrative launch of an intermediate-range “Oreshnik” missile against the Lviv region, which borders EU and NATO territory.
Details of the impact remained limited on Saturday, yet Ukrainian experts suggest that the missile caused only minor damage to an unknown target.
The attack, which likely involved dummy munitions, aimed to send Ukraine’s foreign partners a signal that Russia will not tolerate the presence of their forces in Ukraine, after the Coalition of the Willing detailed such plans at their Summit in Paris on Tuesday, a number of Ukrainian and foreign analysts agree.
“The idea that NATO troops will enter Ukraine and make it impossible to occupy this territory in the future is absolutely unacceptable to Putin”, political analyst Vitaliy Portnikov said on his YouTube channel.
The Kremlin has repeatedly stated that foreign troops would be “legitimate” targets, the US-based Institute for the Study of War also reminded, noting that the strike was meant “to threaten the Coalition of the Willing and deter such troop deployments”.
The multinational force Preparations are already ongoing for the potential deployment of multinational forces, to be led by the UK and France.
The UK government has already allocated £200 million for this purpose, its Defence Secretary John Healey said after his visit to Kyiv on Friday.
In France, President Emmanuel Macron informed local deputies of plans to deploy “several thousand” soldiers to areas further from the frontline in case of a potential ceasefire.
Such preparations cannot force Russia to stop the war yet, but they serve as an important signal to Moscow of the West’s long-term commitment to Ukraine’s security, analysts consulted by EFE believe.
A reaction expected Despite the stressful experience of the Oreshnik strike, locals believe that backing down under the threat would be a mistake.
The best reaction for the West would be to supply Ukraine with Tomahawk (US) and Taurus (Germany) missiles for strikes against Russia, Svyatoslav Pavlyuk, a member of the “Nestor” group of Lviv intellectuals, wrote on his social media.
“It was scary”, recognized Hanna Hoshko, a cultural worker from Lviv. “There was barely any time to seek safety since explosions sounded mere minutes after the air alarm”, she told EFE.
Hoshko accepts that Ukraine’s partners “are scared” of providing more support, yet hopes they realise that Moscow will continue to expand its threats unless it is stopped.
“Is there really no desire to jointly stop this monster that has unleashed so many wars and killed so many people?” she asks rhetorically.
The UN Security Council will discuss the attack on Monday, and several foreign politicians have condemned the strike, including the EU’s chief diplomat, Kaja Kallas.
“I would like the reaction not to stop at words and to involve stronger sanctions and a more active use of Russia’s frozen assets,” journalist Maria Khrebtievska told EFE from Dnipro.
Her city was attacked by Oreshnik on its first use by Russia, in November 2024, yet locals have adapted the best they can to the ongoing strikes by a variety of drones and missiles.
Only tougher actions can force Russia to stop attacking Ukraine, she underlined.
An exaggerated threat The threat posed by the Russian missile should not be overestimated, military analyst Oleksandr Kovalenko noted in his analysis for the Information Resistance Group.
The missile’s destructive force is only 1.5 times that of an Iskander ballistic missile, he underlines, while its production costs 50 times more and is likely limited to one or two pieces a year.
The attacked region lacks modern missile defense systems, which leaves the missile’s ability to evade them in doubt, fellow analyst Kyrylo Danylchenko also noted.
He calls the strike an “attempt to escalate” in direct response to a series of Russia’s “critical defeats”, including the US campaign against oil tankers and “the fiasco” of its air defenses in Venezuela.
This approach will likely backfire, only accelerating the integration of European missile defense systems and strengthening the blockade of the Russian oil fleet, Danylchenko argued. EFE ra/mcd
