Sen. Chris Van Hollen Defends Biden’s Ukraine Missile Policy Amid Concerns of Escalation

Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) has characterized the Biden administration’s recent authorization for Ukraine to conduct long-range strikes within Russian territory as a necessary response to Moscow’s ongoing aggression.

In an interview with To Vima, Van Hollen supported the decision, emphasizing its strategic importance in countering Russian provocations. However, he acknowledged the criticism it has drawn from some quarters, particularly over fears it could escalate tensions in the region.

Van Hollen, a prominent voice in U.S. foreign policy, also addressed broader security challenges, including the unresolved issue of Turkey’s purchase of Russian S-400 missile systems.

He reiterated his strong opposition to compromising with Turkey on this matter, underscoring its implications for NATO’s cohesion and U.S. security interests.

Russia lowered the threshold for using nuclear weapons after President Biden allowed Ukraine to strike deeper into Russian territory with long-range missiles. Is this a calculated risk, or do you see a dangerous escalation ahead?  

I think this was an important step that President Biden took, because you had a situation where Russia was able to attack Ukraine from sites that could not be responded to. And as long as you could do this that the war would continue. And of course, Putin also now has North Korean forces as part of his military operation. So, I think it was the right decision by President Biden.

Ukraine has been asking for this permission for over a year. Why did the Administration choose to act now? Was it because of the mobilization of the North Korean forces?

I think there were a number of factors. I think that was one of the factors. This has been under consideration by the Biden administration for a long time. And I think that might have been the straw that broke the camel’s back.

Critics say the Biden Administration often waits too long to provide critical support to Ukraine, making it less effective. Eventually, it takes the risk, but it comes too late. What’s your take on that?

Well, as the Ukrainians have said, it’s better late than never. I’ve been supporting this move, urging this move for a longer period of time. I understood the Biden administration’s concerns. They expressed those concerns. And so, look, I’m glad they made this decision at this point, and we’ll see what impact it has in terms of the battlefield.

Was President Biden’s decision coordinated with the incoming Trump transition team? Do you think such coordination was necessary?

I hope there’s coordination with Donald Trump you never know I am sure that the Biden administration and the president are willing to brief the incoming Trump administration I know that they would like to do that I know the State Department’s prepared to do that because obviously you want as seamless a transfer of power as possible.

Reports say senior Hamas leaders have moved from Qatar to Turkey, prompting a warning from the State Department. Has the Administration done enough to hold Turkey accountable and stop its dealings with Hamas?

I haven’t seen the actual letter. As you know right now, Hamas is primarily in Qatar. That’s where the discussions have been going on with respect to the ceasefire and exchange of hostages. And I don’t know if that’s going to change. There have been some stories suggesting that Qatar is going to insist that Hamas leave. But Qatar has said that they don’t plan to do that. I think that the Biden administration has done the kind of job and work it should do on that front (pressuring Turkey to stop supporting Hamas).

Turkey hopes the Trump administration will lift CAATSA sanctions if it restricts but doesn’t abandon the S-400 system. Do you think Congress would support such a compromise?

So again, I have to look at what the details are. But I was one of the leaders in the effort to successfully block the transfer of F-35s. And we did that because, as you indicated, Turkey had accepted S-400 systems from the Russians, which put NATO pilots at risk. And so, my position is that we should not consider any transfer of F-35s until the S-400s are totally gotten rid of. There are also, I should say, other policy considerations beyond that with respect to the transfer of the F-35. So, I think Congress will be very concerned and want to look very closely at any change in policy that would allow the transfer of F-35s to Turkey at this time. My position certainly has been that they need to get rid of the S-400.