German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has announced that Germany, the United Kingdom, France and the United States have lifted all restrictions on the range of weapons they supply to Ukraine.
Speaking at the Europaforum hosted by Germany’s WDR public broadcaster, Merz confirmed that Ukraine is now authorised to use Western-supplied weaponry to strike targets within Russian territory, marking what he called a decisive change in the conduct of the war.
“There are no longer any limitations,” Merz stated. “Ukraine can now defend itself, including by striking military targets on Russian soil. Until recently, it was not able to do this, and apart from very rare exceptions, it did not. Now it can. This is a fundamental qualitative shift in Ukraine’s military posture.”
Merz emphasised that the decision is rooted in Ukraine’s right to self-defence, and explicitly referred to the targeting of Russian military-industrial infrastructure and facilities used in support of the ongoing invasion.
Policy Reversal with Strategic Implications
The announcement signals a substantial change in Western policy. Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Washington and European capitals had placed tight restrictions on the use of long-range weapons, citing concerns about escalation. These limitations meant that Ukraine was largely confined to using Western arms within its own borders or in Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory.
Over time, those constraints were gradually relaxed. Initially, there were no limits on striking occupied regions such as Crimea, Donetsk or Luhansk—despite their formal annexation by Russia. Later, Ukraine was quietly permitted to target military sites across the Russian border in regions such as Belgorod and Kursk, but only when such strikes could be justified as preventing imminent offensives.
Merz’s remarks now confirm that Ukraine is no longer bound by geographic restrictions, and can strike military infrastructure wherever it may be located inside the Russian Federation, including deep within its interior.
Kremlin Condemnation
The Kremlin was quick to respond. Dmitry Peskov, spokesperson for President Vladimir Putin, condemned the decision, calling it a “dangerous” move and claiming it undermines Moscow’s supposed efforts towards a political settlement.
“These potential decisions, if indeed taken, are absolutely at odds with our aspirations for a political resolution,” Peskov said, in comments distributed by Russian journalist Aleksandr Yunashev via Telegram.
There was no indication of an immediate Russian response, but senior officials have previously warned of retaliatory measures if NATO-supplied weapons are used against targets within Russia’s sovereign territory.
Effectiveness Dependent on Weapon Deliveries
Despite the shift in policy, Merz stopped short of confirming whether Germany will now deliver Taurus cruise missiles, a system previously withheld due to fears of escalation. Before entering office, Merz had criticised then-Chancellor Olaf Scholz for refusing to supply Taurus missiles and even called for an ultimatum to be issued to President Putin. Since taking office, however, Merz has stated that decisions on weapons systems would be coordinated with allies.
The effectiveness of the new policy will depend heavily on the actual provision of long-range strike systems such as Taurus, the US-made ATACMS, and additional British Storm Shadow missiles. While the range restrictions have been lifted, the required hardware has not yet been committed in adequate quantity.
This is particularly relevant given the uncertainty surrounding continued US support. The previous tranche of American military aid, approved under the Biden administration, is now exhausted. As of late May, the Trump administration has not introduced any new assistance packages, and no long-range strike systems have been pledged.
Without these, the practical significance of the policy shift may be limited—highlighting the gap between public declarations and operational capability.
Strategic Context and War Aims
Supporters of the decision argue that allowing Ukraine to target Russian military-industrial sites, energy infrastructure and command nodes could degrade Russia’s capacity to sustain its war effort. Western strategists increasingly view such an approach not as escalation, but as a rational military response to a protracted invasion that has already caused significant civilian and economic damage in Ukraine.
Analysts also draw historical parallels to the Cold War, when Western defence spending and arms competition ultimately exhausted the centrally planned economy of the Soviet Union. While today’s Russian Federation operates under a different economic model, proponents of the new approach argue that sustained strikes on key military and financial assets could destabilise the current regime and force it to reconsider the viability of its war aims.
However, whether this will lead to a Russian retreat remains uncertain. The Putin government has continued to frame the war as a core component of its state ideology, with broad support from domestic institutions and much of the population.
A New Phase in the Conflict?
If Ukraine begins to receive and employ the weapons required for deep strikes into Russian territory, this could mark a shift in the war’s dynamics. Strategic targets such as refineries, weapons factories, rail depots and decision-making centres may now be within reach. This could, in turn, force Russia to reallocate resources, disperse its military-industrial infrastructure, or seek to shield assets far from the battlefield.
Still, the policy change raises the question of whether Western countries will move from declarations to delivery. As Merz himself acknowledged, stating that Ukraine may strike deep into Russia is not the same as enabling it to do so effectively.
The coming weeks will reveal whether this announcement is followed by the concrete provision of systems such as Taurus—and whether other NATO states will match rhetoric with material support. Until then, Ukraine’s ability to alter the strategic balance on the battlefield remains conditional.
