Kyiv: The U.S. decision to authorize long-range Ukrainian strikes might bolster Kyiv’s efforts to hold its position in Russia's Kursk region, which it seized as a potential bargaining chip in future negotiations. However, analysts suggest this move may come too late to significantly alter the broader trajectory of the war.

In a major shift, President Joe Biden, two months before leaving office, lifted restrictions that previously barred Ukraine from using U.S.-supplied weapons for deeper strikes into Russian territory, according to a Sunday report by Reuters.

Experts remain cautious about its impact. While it may reinforce Ukraine’s operations in Kursk, they doubt it will decisively change the course of the conflict. "This decision comes late, like many others, and may be insufficient to make a meaningful difference," said Michael Kofman, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He added that long-range strikes, while vital, were only one element in a complex war strategy and had been burdened with unrealistic expectations.

The durability of the new policy also remains uncertain, as it faces criticism from figures like Richard Grenell, a foreign policy advisor to incoming President Donald Trump. Trump, set to replace Biden on January 20, has promised to end the war swiftly but has not detailed his approach. His spokesperson declined to comment.

Ukraine had long lobbied for the policy change, arguing that its inability to strike Russian airbases hosting warplanes targeting Ukraine was a major disadvantage.

Meanwhile, Russian forces have advanced at their quickest pace in years across eastern Ukraine, pressuring Kyiv in multiple regions. Moscow has denounced the U.S. policy shift as a dangerous escalation, claiming Ukraine would need NATO assistance to execute such strikes. The Kremlin stated Monday that this move implicates the U.S. directly in the conflict.

Ukraine is expected to initiate its first strikes soon, likely using ATACMS rockets with a range of up to 190 miles (306 km), Reuters noted. A Central European defense official remarked that while these strikes might enhance Ukraine’s defense against air assaults, they are unlikely to be a gamechanger, as Russia has already moved many air assets beyond the reach of Western weapons.

In Kursk, Ukraine’s primary focus, Kyiv is attempting to hold onto a salient captured in its first cross-border assault in August. Analysts believe this territory could serve as leverage in any future negotiations, particularly as Kyiv faces mounting pressure from Russian forces and reports of North Korean troops joining the battle.

"ATACMS missiles could target critical Russian and North Korean assets, bolstering Ukraine's ability to defend the Kursk salient," said Kofman. However, Rob Lee of the Foreign Policy Research Institute noted that holding Kursk long-term would depend heavily on resources and reinforcements.

France and Britain have not yet indicated whether they will follow the U.S. lead in allowing Ukraine to use Storm Shadow/SCALP cruise missiles. The effectiveness of such weapons will also depend on the volume of missiles Ukraine can launch, as Russia has developed capabilities to intercept them.

On the streets of Kyiv, reactions were mixed. Many Ukrainians welcomed the decision but expressed frustration over its timing. "This should have been deployed as a preventative measure or an immediate response in early 2022. Now, its impact is minimal," said 21-year-old Olga Korovyachuk.