- by William Briggs
- The Guardian
- Issue #2126
Long-range Naval Strike Missiles and Joint Strike Missiles to be manufactured in Australia with Norway’s Kongsberg Defence. Photo: Kongsberg (CC BY 4.0)
A dangerous escalation of the NATO war against Russia has moved from the possible to the probable. Zelensky has been long urging his US and NATO sponsors to give the green light for Ukraine to launch long range missile strikes into Russian territory. Biden, in the dying days of his presidency, has given the go-ahead. It will have serious ramifications.
The weapons have been ready and primed for some time. As the world waits to see what the Trump presidency portends, the USA, NATO, and Ukraine seem ready to act to ensure that the war will drag on even longer and with greater loss of life.
The only reason that Zelensky had not yet been given that permission earlier is that Putin has let it be known that it would be regarded as a virtual declaration of war. He reminded the West there would be a response and that it would be a significant response. In September, Putin stated that “it is not a question of allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not. It is about deciding whether NATO countries become directly involved in the military conflict or not.”
The decision would be an obvious one. In the event of such a decision, Moscow would make “appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.”
The UK has already provided Ukraine with Storm Shadow missiles with a range of 250 kilometres. They are cruise missiles and are launched from aircraft. The Ukraine also has been supplied with ATACM missiles from the USA, with a range of 300 kilometres. These are claimed to be for use within Ukrainian territory. The question remains why such obviously offensive weapons, designated as long range, are in the armoury of Ukraine that is supposedly fighting a defensive war.
It had always been anticipated that Biden would allow the Ukrainians to use these weapons. Observers had predicted in September that such a decision would be made before his presidency ended.
Then NATO Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg, added fuel to the fire, saying he did not feel that using these weapons against Russia would cross any “red line,” that it would not be an escalation of the war and that he did not believe that Putin would “respond.” Stoltenberg said that Russia “realises that NATO is the strongest military alliance in the world.”
Moscow was quick to respond. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov commented that Stoltenberg’s remarks were dangerous. “This ostentatious desire not to take seriously the Russian president’s statements is a move that is completely short-sighted and unprofessional … Stoltenberg’s position is extremely provocative and dangerous.”
Two months later we are faced by the harsh reality.
It is provocative. It is dangerous. From the very beginning of this conflict, the West has made it clear that it would continue until Russia was bled dry, and weakened. For Russia it has become an existential crisis.
Such an escalation will make matters far worse.
The European community have been drawn deeper into the mire. The argument that the billions of dollars being pumped into the war was almost an act of altruism in the face of Russian ‘aggression’ needs to be finally put to bed. It is a war being waged by the USA and its European allies, not to protect Ukrainian sovereignty but to dismember Russia.
