“Ukraine used U.S. ATACMS missiles to strike Russian territory on Tuesday, taking advantage of newly granted permission from the outgoing administration of U.S. President Joe Biden on the war's 1,000th day…

“On Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a new nuclear doctrine that appeared intended as a warning to Washington. It lowers the threshold under which Russia might use atomic weapons to include responding to attacks that threaten its territorial integrity. Washington said the update to the nuclear doctrine was no surprise and rejected ‘more of the same irresponsible rhetoric from Russia’.” Reuters

‍“The United States said on Monday it was Russia that is escalating the conflict in Ukraine by deploying North Korean troops, after the Kremlin warned that Washington would deepen its involvement in the war by allowing Kyiv's forces to strike far into Russia with U.S.-made weapons.” Reuters‍

‍Many on both sides support allowing Ukraine to strike targets inside Russia:

‍“On the campaign trail, Trump claimed that he would be able to end the war in Ukraine ‘within 24 hours’ of being elected president—promising a deal that was far more favorable to his supposed ally Putin. Two weeks after Trump’s election victory, it seems that Russia is taking the news as permission to ramp up its assault against Ukraine, and its Western allies like NATO. Within days of Trump winning the presidential election, Putin sent tens of thousands of soldiers to the Ukrainian war front after Trump told him not to escalate the situation.”

‍Edith Olmsted, New Republic

‍“Mr. Biden is trying to strengthen Ukraine’s position before he leaves office… The tragedy is that Mr. Biden has hamstrung Ukraine on the delivery and use of advanced weapons for so long. Donald Trump says he will try to end the war soon, though how he will do that is far from certain. But the ATACMS decision and military aid could help promote a settlement if it puts Ukraine in a stronger negotiating position…

“The Trump camp leaked that, in a recent phone call, the former and future President had asked Vladimir Putin not to escalate in Ukraine. Mr. Putin’s blunt reply to that request is the North Korean troop deployment and the weekend missile barrage. The attempt to destroy Ukraine’s energy supply is especially cruel as winter nears… Mr. Putin is telling Mr. Trump that his settlement terms will be harsh. Mr. Trump will have to calculate his policy accordingly.”

‍Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal

‍“Military experts doubt that firing Western missiles into Russia — whether ATACMS or similar systems that Britain and France may now supply — will alter the course of the war any more than the other vaunted weapons the United States agreed to supply after an initial reluctance, like the Abrams tank or the F-16 jet fighter. Ukraine has already been firing its own drones deep into Russia, and it has been using ATACMS against Russian targets in Crimea and other occupied territories. Russia, meanwhile, is still steadily grinding forward at a rate of up to a mile a day in the Donetsk region…

“In any case, Trump will be able to return to a red light on the ATACMS when he takes office on Jan. 20… Kremlin-allied commentators tried to get Trump’s ear by claiming that Biden’s decision reduced his negotiating options and left him with the threat of a global standoff. But then Biden’s last act on the international stage may also help the Ukrainians persuade Trump that if they are properly armed and can stand up to Russia, a negotiated settlement becomes more likely.”

‍Serge Schmemann, New York Times

‍“How many of Putin’s self-set red lines have come and gone despite the outcry of Western quislings who foolishly take the autocrat at his word? We were credulously informed by Putin’s boosters at home that the provision of long-range rockets, cluster munitions, M1 Abrams battle tanks, and fixed-wing aircraft amounted to ‘crossing a red line.’ And yet, we’re all still here…  

“We were told that incursions into sovereign Russian territory crossed an inviolable threshold. But when Kyiv did just that, Putin’s regime downplayed the event lest he risk acknowledging the scale of the catastrophe he invited with his war of choice and foment a backlash against the war among the Russian public…

“A step as rash as engineering a nuclear event would imperil Russia’s strategic objectives well beyond Ukraine’s borders and imperil his longevity in his role, even assuming such an epochal incident does not beget a reciprocal response from NATO’s nuclear states. Nuclear weapons are useful for one thing: preventing the use of nuclear weapons. Westerners who jump every time Putin taps on one of his warheads either do not understand deterrence themselves or hope you don’t.”

‍Noah Rothman, National Review

‍“This is the kind of escalation against which Vladimir Putin has been brandishing the threat of using Russia’s nuclear weapons, which he again brandished earlier today. That said, the impending Trump presidency has effectively negated such threats. Putin knows that Trump will be happy to help arrange a cease-fire in which Russia gains vast Ukrainian territories and perhaps can even engineer the installation of a more pro-Russian Ukrainian government. After all, Trump’s favorite European government is Hungary’s, a pro-Russian illiberal semi-autocracy…

“Going nuclear, however, would screw up such a scenario; not even Trump could ignore the backlash against a Russian nuclear attack. This has rendered Putin’s threats even less real, and more of the saber-rattling variety, than they were before. In that sense, Trump’s ascent has freed Biden to give Ukraine a weapons system that previously appeared to run the risk of at least some kind of Russian escalation.”

‍Harold Meyerson, American Prospect

‍‍Other opinions below.