Russia-Ukraine War: Ignoring Moscow’s red lines can be catastrophic

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was established after the Second World War as a deterrent to potential Soviet aggression on some countries in Europe. The western countries were skeptical about the USSR and saw it as the next biggest threat to Europe’s security after Germany’s defeat.

The Soviet Union responded by forming the Warsaw pact military alliance to countervail the US-led NATO.

Fast forward, President Gobarshev dissolved the Warsaw Pact under the condition that NATO will not expand further eastward. It became obvious after the Cuban missile crisis that the growing influence of the two superpowers along a rival’s territory posed a great threat not only to each other, but to global peace and stability.

In 1991, the USSR, which formed the basis of the formation of NATO collapsed. Surprisingly, NATO has since expanded into a larger alliance. Several countries, including ones that emerged from the former Soviet Union have joined as members.

Ukraine has been pushing hard to join former Soviet states like Estonia and Latvia in NATO. However, the Russian Federation, officially recognized heir to the USSR, finds this proposal disturbing.

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has raised genuine concerns about NATO’s presence in their Eastern European neighbors and the possible security implications it will have on Russia.

These concerns are quite consistent with a statement made by CIA director, William Burns, in 2008 that, “not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests.”

Ukraine's right to security?

The Kiev regime’s bid to join NATO can only be justified under ‘Russophobic’ lenses. Every country, including Russia, has the right to safeguard their national security interests. By deterring NATO expansion towards their backyard, Russia is also defending itself.

It will be unjust to allow Ukraine secure itself at the expense of Russia’s security. The international community should not expect Russia to welcome the US and its allies along their borders, especially when America’s post-Cold War Security and foreign policy (Wolfowitz doctrine) placed a target at Russia’s back simply because Ukraine feels entitled to join NATO. That’s not how things work in the arena of international power politics.

The presence of global powers along the borders of rivals always trigger insecurity. And the last time a superpower felt threatened by the presence of another power around its territory, the world was pushed to the brink of a nuclear armageddon.

Poking the bear

The west’s involvement in the Special Military Operation (SMO) has become obvious to the international community. Several weapons - air-defense systems, ATACMS, HIMARS, tanks, UAVs etc. - have been supplied by NATO and EU countries to support Ukraine against Russia, albeit restrictions following threats by Russia regarding the use of western-supplied weapons in Ukraine.

However, just days ago, members of the EU parliament have pushed for a resolution urging the EU to give Ukraine the green light to attack Russia with western supplied weapons.

This has provoked reactions from top Russian officials. The chairman of the State Duma (Russia’ parliament), Vyacheslav Volodin, has stated emphatically that the EU’s action can only result in one thing - a confrontation with Russia.

Although Russia admits its military capabilities may not necessarily match up to the combined forces of NATO, they have made it clear that when push comes to shove, the vast stockpiles of nuclear warheads will be utilized to defend the Russian motherland. This is going to be a huge problem.

The last time a country used a nuclear weapon was during the Second World War when America’s B-29 bomber dropped the ‘Little Boy’ atomic bomb in Hiroshima, Japan. The bomb’s explosive capacity was estimated at 15 kilotons of Trinitrotoluene. More than half of the city was destroyed and several people died as a result.

With the world advancing rapidly in technology, countries have developed nuclear weapons with greater trinitrotoluene capacities and capable of wreaking far greater destructions.

At the height of the Cold War, for instance, the Soviet Union’s detonated nuclear arsenal- the ‘Tsar Bomba’ - was 1,500 times powerful than the bombs used on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Even today, Russia can boast of some of the most advanced nuclear weapons. They are already leading in stockpiles . Atop of that, Russia is a nuclear triad power. This makes Russia the only country, aside from US and India, who can launch nuclear weapons even after the country has been blown into smithereens.

Provoking a country with such power might come at a deadly cost. At the end there will be no winners. Only losers.