Can Germany’s long-range missile partnership shift battlefield dynamics in Ukraine? German military expert provides his analysis to FOCUS Online

The recent announcement by Friedrich Merz that Germany plans to sign an agreement for the production of long-range weapons within Ukraine demonstrates a significant shift by the new German government's Ukraine policy from the predecessor Scholz-administration. While the new collaboration leaves Ukraine still longing for the long-awaited and requested German Taurus cruise missiles, the new addition to Kyiv's arsenal would assist the army to strike beyond Ukraine’s borders into Russian territory. However, a senior German military expert warns in a conversation to German media that the new joint effort's immediate impact on the battlefield may be limited.

Retired Colonel Wolfgang Richter, an Associate Fellow at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, discusses the military and political consequences of this decision in an interview with Germany’s FOCUS Online.

According to the military man, Germany has technically never limited the technical range of the weapons it sent to Ukraine, but it did restrict their use against targets inside Russia. He points out that Chancellor Olaf Scholz made the first exception to this policy in mid-2024, permitting cross-border attacks when Russian offensives were launched directly from adjacent regions such as Kursk and Belgorod. Now, Merz’s statement removes even that geographical caveat, effectively greenlighting Ukrainian use of German arms on Russian soil under broader conditions.

Richter explains that this decision is less about military escalation and more about signalling resolve. It comes in response to increased Russian aerial bombardment of Ukraine and is intended to support Ukrainian deterrence, while also pressuring Moscow into considering a ceasefire. Coordinating with other European allies, Richter believes that the move reflects growing Western frustration with Russia’s continued aggression and an urgency to shift the battlefield dynamics in Ukraine’s favour.

When asked which weapon systems are affected, Richter mentions that the decision likely applies to systems like the Panzerhaubitze 2000 and the RH 155, as well as the US-made M270 MLRS multiple rocket launcher. Although only a limited number of M270s have been delivered, their potential impact is notable due to their extended range. The authorization to target Russian logistics, command centers, and troop concentrations could add depth to Ukraine’s defensive capabilities.

Ukraine’s pride for long-range naval attacks

The German newspaper NTV reports that the agreement in question may in fact involve the Ukrainian-made Neptune cruise missile, which is already in use in Ukraine and was developed by Luch Design Bureau in Kyiv. It has been employed by Ukrainian forces since 2020 and can travel about 1,000 kilometres before turning toward its target. Its first use in battle came in April 2022, when it was deployed against the Russian frigate Admiral Essen. That trial was followed days later by what would become one of the most important events in the war, when two such missiles struck and sank the €750 million Russian cruiser Moskva, the flagship of Russia's Black Sea fleet. The design is based on the Soviet Kh-35 anti-ship missile but with enhanced range, targeting capabilities and electronics. R-360 Neptune was originally designed as a shore-to-ship cruise missile carrying a 150-kilogram warhead and with a range of up to 300 kilometres; it was first shown by Ukraine in 2025.

Ukraine worked on extending the Neptune's range and turning it into a missile suitable for use in land attack. The result is the Neptune-MD, also called the Long Neptune. The Deutsche Welle reports that Ukraine used the new rocket to hit a Russian oil refinery in the Black Sea port of Tuapse in March. While the Neptune already outperforms the iconic German Taurus missile in terms of range, it falls far short of the Taurus in terms of penetrative power at the target. The technical expertise exists in Ukraine to further improve the cruise missile. However, funding is lacking, especially for mass production.

Past precedents

However, Richter tempers expectations by noting that Ukraine already had some other long-range capabilities too, thanks to drones and missile systems supplied by countries like the US, France, and the UK. These have been used to strike behind Russian lines for some time. What’s new is the ability to include German weapons in this mix, allowing for better integration and expanded options during offensive and defensive operations.

Despite this, he stresses that the actual influence on the current front lines—particularly in the contested Donbas region—is expected to be minimal. According to Richter, Russian forces are slowly but steadily advancing there, and the removal of German targeting limitations won’t fundamentally alter that dynamic. The existing German systems were already being used to their full extent within Ukraine, and the shift in targeting rules won’t significantly increase their effectiveness in that context.

Richter argues that more impactful support would involve strengthening Ukraine’s air defence capabilities. Russia’s airstrikes have increasingly targeted Ukrainian arms production facilities, which are crucial since they now meet around 60% of the country’s military needs. While drone and missile debris often unintentionally strikes civilian areas, the core objective of these Russian attacks is to disrupt Ukraine’s military supply chain. Thus, the German experts believes bolstering air defences would have a more immediate and protective effect on both military infrastructure and civilians than expanding artillery permissions.

By Nazrin Sadigova