By using ECSS site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
ECSS - Egyptian Center for Strategic StudiesECSS - Egyptian Center for Strategic Studies
  • Home
  • International Relations
    International Relations
    Show More
    Top News
    Another obstacle on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam?
    June 5, 2020
    Varied paths of reform in Africa
    March 22, 2019
    G20 Membership Justified: Africa and the Road to the G20
    June 14, 2020
    Latest News
    2025 Yearender: Flood fallout
    January 20, 2026
    A Strategic reorientation: A critical reading of the 2025 US National Security Strategy
    January 18, 2026
    A diplomatic maneuver: Israel’s recognition of Somaliland
    January 17, 2026
    2025 Yearender: China’s multipolar world
    January 15, 2026
  • Defense & Security
    Defense & Security
    Show More
    Top News
    A Multi-dimensional Affair: Women and Terrorism in Africa
    June 14, 2020
    On deradicalisation: Marc Sageman and the psychology of jihadists
    June 22, 2020
    Assessing Deterrent Measures and the Prospects of War: US Military Movement in the Gulf to Confront Iran
    June 22, 2020
    Latest News
    Israel-Iran War: Does Israel Stand Alone?
    June 18, 2025
    Navigating Security and Diplomacy: What Russia’s Delisting of the Taliban Means for Bilateral Ties
    May 17, 2025
    Lakurawa: Armed Bandit Violence in Nigeria
    May 12, 2025
    Europe amid US–Iran Escalation: Can It Play the Diplomat or Become Entangled in the Crisis?
    April 13, 2025
  • Public Policy
    Public Policy
    Show More
    Top News
    Sinai: A Strategy for Development amid Fighting Terrorism
    June 17, 2020
    Egypt’s Comprehensive Vision for Human Rights
    June 22, 2020
    The Right to Health in Egypt
    June 22, 2020
    Latest News
    Weaponization of Resources: The Role of Rare Earth Metals in the US-China Trade War
    May 25, 2025
    The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism: A Catalyst or a Challenge for Egypt’s Export Ambitions?
    May 15, 2025
    The Suez Canal amidst Global Competition (3): National Strides Outpacing Time
    April 29, 2025
    Gaza’s Changing Demographics: The Toll of War and Blockade
    March 9, 2025
  • Analysis
    • Opinion
    • Analysis
    • Situation Assessment
    • Readings
  • Activities
    • Conferences
    • ECSS Agenda
    • Panel Discussion
    • Seminar
    • Workshops
  • ECSS Shop
  • العربية
  • Defense & Security
  • International Relations
  • Public Policy
All Rights Reserved to ECSS © 2022,
Reading: Towards More Aid: The Implications of Biden’s Visit to the US Armory
Share
Notification Show More
Latest News
Book Review | The struggle for economic sovereignty: Who owns the instruments of power?
Readings
Displacement from Gaza: Deconstructing the idea, doctrine, and plan
Readings
The Egyptian Center for Strategic Studies participates in the 57th Cairo International Book Fair for the sixth year
Readings
2025 Yearender: Flood fallout
Iranian Studies Palestinian & Israeli Studies
A Strategic reorientation: A critical reading of the 2025 US National Security Strategy
Palestinian & Israeli Studies
Aa
ECSS - Egyptian Center for Strategic StudiesECSS - Egyptian Center for Strategic Studies
Aa
  • اللغة العربية
  • International Relations
  • Defense & Security
  • Special Edition
  • Public Policy
  • Analysis
  • Activities & Events
  • Home
  • اللغة العربية
  • Categories
    • International Relations
    • Defense & Security
    • Public Policy
    • Analysis
    • Special Edition
    • Activities & Events
    • Opinions Articles
  • Bookmarks
Follow US
  • Advertise
All Rights Reserved to ECSS © 2022, Powered by EgyptYo Business Services.
Analysis

Towards More Aid: The Implications of Biden’s Visit to the US Armory

Khaled Okasha
Last updated: 2022/05/25 at 12:14 PM
Khaled Okasha
Share
9 Min Read
Towards More Aid: The Implications of Biden's Visit to the US Armory
Towards More Aid: The Implications of Biden's Visit to the US Armory
SHARE

On 3 May, President Joe Biden visited the Lockheed Martin facility in Alabama, a major armory of the US military manufacturing that supplies weapon systems to Ukraine in its war against Russia. The visit, the first since President Biden took office and perhaps since his time as Vice President with former President Barack Obama, was described as being “unprecedented” and it indeed is, particularly because it carries with it a special recognition of the military institution that, according to US estimates, has managed so far to cause Russia to stumble militarily.

Implications of the Visit

Biden’s visit to the Lockheed Martin weapons plant was perhaps motivated by the facility’s work on producing Javelin anti-tank missiles, which proved to be a decisive weapon in the Russia-Ukraine war. 

Javelin is a 15.9 kg man-portable missile that enabled Ukraine to inflict serious damage on Russian armored vehicles. This missile system, of which Ukraine had had a few before the war, has become increasingly in demand given the developments that the war imposed on multiple fronts. In effect, Ukrainian units were able to use these missiles efficiently, inflicting heavy losses on the columns of tanks that ignited the spark of the war on the Ukrainian cities. Perhaps a remarkable example of the effective use of Javelin was clear in the early weeks of the war when it was used against the huge column of armored vehicles that moved towards Kyiv and continued to advance from the north and northwest along an estimated distance of 35 km, reaching the border, 10 km near the outskirts of the Ukrainian capital. After Weeks of this strategic positioning, described by Russian media and official statements as a siege of the capital that paves the way for entering it or bringing down the Ukrainian regime, Russia announced withdrawing its columns and redeploying them according to a different plan. 

At that time, some sketchy reports on this withdrawal were released. They, however, failed to reveal the truth about what exactly happened and attributed this retreat to the heavy losses that the Russian incurred, particularly with regard to tanks. Since then, the significance of Javelin missiles started to unfold.

Towards Greater Support

In his statement at the Lockheed Martin facility, Biden urged the Congress to approve additional funding that would allow Lockheed Martin to expand the production of Javelin missiles and their ammunition, in a way that help meet the needs of Ukraine, which, according to US reports, fire about 500 Javelin missiles daily. Given the $304 billion generous support the United States provided to Ukraine over two months, Biden isn’t likely to opposition within the  Congress, whose Democratic and Republican members are psyched to get into this fight against the Russian regime and seem to be in agreement on this, tilting either to hardline or more strict positions.

Currently, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon Technologies are involved in a joint venture to develop the Javelin system, a project considered the most promising and the one the meets developments of asymmetric warfare. Since 1996, the US military has been equipped with a relatively old model of Javelin that proved of high precision and effective in destroying armored vehicles.

Today, with the outbreak of the Ukraine war, the US military plans to invest more in the development research of Javelin, efforts that have given rise recently to an advanced variant called Javelin FGM-148F, which has proven remarkably efficient in the Ukrainian theater of operations. Javelin FGM-148F is a major development of the multi-purpose warhead as it maintains its high lethality against armored vehicles while being reinforced with lethality against personnel, vehicles, and personnel carriers.

The Raytheon-Lockheed Martin joint venture development research was geared towards developing a new variant that has a lower cost and weight, which would give it comparative advantages, along with the steady development of its accuracy and firing range. These were the aspects that needed development based on the wide use of Javelin in Ukraine in different combat environments and areas that are mostly populated and that pose the dilemma of waging urban and suburban wars and represented a great challenge to the Russian advancement and decisiveness of the battle. Perhaps this is why there were several rounds of negotiations with Kyiv to create “safe humanitarian corridors” to evacuate cities and areas where the fight is taking place, a call that Kyiv rejects. In this vein, there have been several accusations and counter-accusations by both sides on the use of civilians as human shields to impede military decisiveness. Seemingly, the new advanced weapons, such as Javelin, among others, achieve effectiveness on different fighting axes and enable Ukrainian fighters to carry out maneuvers that inflict serious losses on Russia. In return, Russia responds with more fire and wide destructive power aimed at inflicting heavy losses on the Ukrainian military units, which would push them to reconsider their retrenchment within cities, particularly with the associated blow to their morale, given their capability to continue to fight.  

Russia’s response wasn’t only restricted to inflicting direct losses on the Ukrainian forces as Moscow declared that Western arms convoys to Ukraine are legitimate targets of the Russian army. Evidently, the Russian military intelligence is engaged in a fierce struggle with its counterparts in order to obtain information regarding the West’s supply lines into Ukraine. While Russia didn’t manage to completely cut out these supply arteries, it succeeded in launching high-impact strikes and disrupted the pace of access to the West’s supply. The most striking example of these strikes was the Russian long-range missile strike on 13 March on the Yavorovsky military base, located 30 km from the far west of Ukraine near the Polish border.

However, the latest and most dangerous strike took place this week, which may represent an advanced Russian aerial targeting of supply lines. Unexpectedly, NATO announced that it expeditiously sent combat fighters to track and intercept Russian aircraft that were executing mysterious overflight in unconventional air border areas of NATO countries.

This emergency aerial response from NATO took place a few times) sometimes over the Baltic Sea and at others in the Black Sea region) against the background of the overflight of Russian aircraft in these areas without filing a flight plan and without communicating with air traffic controller, which was interpreted by NATO Air Intelligence as being sudden and secret overflights that chase specific targets. NATO aircraft that flew to track and intercept airspace violations by Russia took off from Poland, Denmark, France, Spain, Romania and the United Kingdom, following NATO’s detection of new paths taken by Russian aircraft, which indicates these countries feel an imminent or looming danger, if Russia’s subsequent air attack was interpreted as a test of NATO’s speed of response.

This article was originally published in Arabic on 15 May 2022.

Related Posts

Book Review | The struggle for economic sovereignty: Who owns the instruments of power?

Displacement from Gaza: Deconstructing the idea, doctrine, and plan

The Egyptian Center for Strategic Studies participates in the 57th Cairo International Book Fair for the sixth year

Gaza Crisis between Israeli and American Perspectives

TAGGED: Army, Biden, Featured, Lockheed Martin facility, Russia, Ukraine
Khaled Okasha May 25, 2022
Share this Article
Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Whatsapp LinkedIn Telegram Email Copy Link Print
Khaled Okasha
By Khaled Okasha
General Manager

Stay Connected

Facebook Like
Twitter Follow
Instagram Follow
Youtube Subscribe

Latest Articles

Beyond Tigray: Wielding Hunger as a Weapon in Ethiopia’s Civil War
International Relations August 22, 2021
Gaza’s Long Wait: 467 Days from Siege to Ceasefire
Palestinian & Israeli Studies February 12, 2025
The War to Come
Opinions Articles September 8, 2024
The Social Repercussions of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on Israel
Arab & Regional Studies November 26, 2023

Latest Tweets

//

The Egyptian Center for Strategic Studies is an independent non-profit think tank providing decision-makers by Policy alternatives, the center was established in 2018 and comprises a group of experts and researchers from different generations and scientific disciplines.

International Relations

  • African Studies
  • American Studies
  • Arab & Regional Studies
  • Asian Studies
  • European Studies
  • Palestinian & Israeli Studies

Defence & Security

  • Armament
  • Cyber Security
  • Extremism
  • Terrorism & Armed Conflict

Public Policies

  • Development & Society
  • Economic & Energy Studies
  • Egypt & World Stats
  • Media Studies
  • Public Opinion
  • Women & Family Studies

Who we are

The Egyptian Center for Strategic Studies (ECSS) is an independent Egyptian think tank established in 2018. The Center adopts a national, scientific perspective in examining strategic issues and challenges at the local, regional, and international levels, particularly those related to Egypt’s national security and core national interests.

The Center’s output is geared toward addressing national priorities, offering anticipatory visions for policy and decision alternatives, and enhancing awareness of various transformations through diverse forms of scientific production and research activities.

All Rights Reserved to Egyptian Center for Strategic Studies - ECSS © 2023

Removed from reading list

Undo
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?