How would Russia respond?
Now that the United States has allowed Ukrainians to use the Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) inside the Russian territory, we await if the Russian response would unleash World War III, and worse, a Nuclear holocaust.
It doesn’t stop here.
If the US is doing so, the UK repeats the lines of its masters and Keir Starmer has allowed Storm Shadow missiles to be used inside Russia. Le Figaro informs us that Paris is queuing up too.
(As I am just about closing this piece, the US has also authorised shipment of anti-personnel mines to Ukraine, banned by the Ottawa Treaty to which both are signatories, so that civilians on those war-torn areas could keep blowing up for decades.)
In other words, the West and NATO is now legally at war and one must dread Russia’s response which for sure would be coming.
Is Vladimir Putin going to make a mess of European cities or is there any other tactical piece which he has up on this chessboard?
Putin knows it as does the NATO that the latter is in no position to take on the Russians. Even a casual look at the size and firepower across the two sides conveys NATO is a mismatch to the Russians in a conventional war.
The entire logistics required, that all nations on NATO’s roll need to be on the same page, not to say the consent of its citizens to let its fellow men die in a faraway war with which they have nothing to do, is a no-go. Why, embassies in Kiev are already beginning to shut down in anticipation of Russians’ response.
Then why this suicidal impulse? Why this ratcheting up of war, almost wishing a Nuclear blowout? Haven’t the use of hundreds of ATACMS in Crimea shown that it hasn’t made a fig of a difference?
You don’t win wars by firing a few extra missiles.
A few hundred miles extra provided to Ukraine’s firepower would only go thus far as the map below illustrate.
Of course the ATACMS could target a nuclear reactor plant which would send a cloud of radiation—a la Chernobyl— towards European cities and turn Zelensky’s masters into his enemies. That is, if Ukrainians could somehow operate it without involving the Americans and NATO personnel.
The Ukrainians know it; so does Washington, Paris, Berlin and London.
Yet Washington has chosen neither to deny nor confirm the report from that propaganda tool called New York Times (NYT), knowing fully well that its use puts the United States at war with Russia.
There is no noise either from the incumbent Trump administration that it violates the US Constitution (Article 1 and 8) which empowers only the Congress to declare a war.
Or that it’s a betrayal of the people’s vote against the war in favour of Trump; that it puts the security of Americans and its cities at risk, not to say the lives of US forces on foreign land, now that the Russians have forewarned with its new Nuclear doctrine of treating it as an act of war.
The one word from Trump’s transition team is that it could “reconsider” this decision—or in other words he wouldn’t, hoping he could force the Russians into offering him an honourable exit.
The thinking is, attacks inside Russia would fuel domestic anger and it would force Vladimir Putin either to go to extreme or settle it out, giving Trump, and America, a face-saving deal.
Biden, while letting Ukraine use his toys as it wants, is perfectly aware that Kiev can’t win this war. Yet he wants to escalate so that Trump inherits a war from which there is no escaping without a loss of face.
Further, Biden is banking on Putin taking an extreme measure which would rally the masses of West to be behind their warmongering elites.
This has been the US policy all along—provoke the Russian Bear into taking steps which could be construed as Moscow’s aggression and fuel the profits of military-industrial complex.
Biden, and the US, couldn’t care less about Ukraine. Perpetual war is their de facto foreign policy to keep profits raining in for the private arms industry who, in case you don’t know, run the US government.
So if the conflict escalates, not only Trump would be put in an awkward spot but a resolute measure by Russians would keep the war raging—and keep the weapons-merchants grinning from ear-to-ear.
Ironically, Putin might be welcoming this reckless move on the part of West. He would be on the right side of international law for Russia’s sovereignty has been breached. The world opinion would be with Putin. He would be free to attack satellites and radars outside the domain of Russian airspace. All those AWACS aircrafts, escorted by NATO fighters over the Black Sea, which Ukraine is using freely, could have the Father Time calling.
As an asymmetrical measure, Russia could empower, say Houthis, who could deliver a few telling blows on US warships in Red Sea. Both Syria and Iran could be further beefed to inflict damage on already harried US bases in the Middle East.
My guess is Russia would deliver a telling blow soon but it won’t be to a NATO nation. It knows that the United States is banking on a “Pearl Harbor” moment which, in case you don’t know, was tricked on to the Japanese to respond. The same “victim card” which was behind 9/11 or the occurrence of October 7 when Israelis looked the other way.
But that won’t be the end of it.
The Biden administration and West in general would keep provoking Russians everyday before Trump ascends in the hope that Moscow falls to the bait. Putin, that masterful strategist, a judoka who is taught to prioritize defence, would keep sparring just enough. Anything less than a Nuclear attack is unlikely to force him to provide the West with the excuse they are looking for. Yet it is a dangerous escalation and the next seven weeks would have the humanity on edge.
