Last week Europe took a major step towards full scale military confrontation between Russia and NATO. De facto low level confrontation is already happening, but no official acknowledgement has been made. If this conflict was officially declared then it would trigger World War 3 scale of confrontation with millions of troops on both sides, not to mention thousands of nuclear warheads. NATO’s half-in, half-out position was always likely to be a slippery slope into full-on confrontation. A huge slip along that slope was made when several NATO member countries authorised the use of their long range weapons to strike Russian territory. Almost immediately two long range strikes were reportedly made on Russian radar facilities deep inside Russia. One in the Krasnodar region and one in the Orsk region, these are the two radar facilities in the map in the bottom left (map from Telegram channel milinfolive).
The Orsk facility is around 1,800 km to the east of the border with Ukraine. These strikes seem to meet Russia’s criteria for the use of nuclear weapons. There are several triggers in their nuclear posture, one of which is the destruction of miliary infrastructure which forms part of their nuclear deterrent. It is likely that these two strikes on early warning radar facilities would meet this criteria. This reality has not acted as a deterrent to the NATO countries facilitating these strikes.
Thinking Coalition’s Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
President Putin made it clear in a recent press Q & A session in Tashkent that NATO is already heavily involved in acquiring target information and controlling the flight paths of long range weapons being used by Ukraine1. He explained that Western weapons require the use of satellite targeting and involve highly trained operators, which Ukraine does not possess and are therefore provided by NATO countries. He particularly referred to NATO officials from “small European countries” which appears to be a thinly veiled reference to the Baltic States. Certainly the leaders of the those countries have been amongst the most outspoken over the conflict and have repeatedly pushed for escalation and the defeat of Russia. It appears this attitude is driven, in part, by historic grievances over the actions of the Soviet Union in the 1950s.
Commentators on Russian TV have discussed these strikes and one suggested forming an international commission to establish whether, or not, the drones used were British-Portuguese made2. In the event that that this was confirmed and given NATO’s involvement in target selection and flight control, this should be presented to the U.N. and acknowledged as an act of military aggression on the part of the U.K. against Russia. This would then provide a legal basis on which Russia could strike U.K. assets and the commentator suggested a 500 kg conventional missile strike on a location near Westminster Palace. Having said that, it is obvious that Russia leadership wants to avoid a confrontation with the whole of NATO.
The problem is that Russia and the leadership of several Western countries appears to be locked into an escalation spiral. Many of the Washington war mongers, like General Ben Hodges, are openly calling for the complete destruction of the Russian Federation, which they have termed “decolonisation”.
Like any conflict this one has a long and complicated history starting in the early 1990s with repeated assurances that NATO would not expand eastwards and that the U.S. would not seek to take advantage of the roll-back of the Soviet Union. Unfortunately the U.S. decided to do pretty well the exact opposite as set out in the leaked 1992 Wolfowitz doctrine. The Russian side is also not blameless, but no right-minded person believes the Western propaganda that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was “unprovoked”.
The process of repeated escalation is bad news for everyone. Western leaders appear prepared to drag their respective armies into the Ukraine conflict despite the fact that an overwhelming majority of their citizens do NOT want to see their troops in Ukraine3.
On the Russian side, the strikes will likely increase support for President Putin’s actions and strengthen the domestic narrative that this is a resurgent Nazi movement intent on replaying World War 2 and destroying Russia.
The situation unfolding at the moment is terrifying. The trite answer is that Russian troops should leave Eastern Ukraine. At the same time it is worth remembering the outline peace agreement that Russia circulated in December 2021, which seemed reasonable;
NATO non-expansion
Non-deployment of strike weapons that are a threat to Russia.
Returning military and military-technical configuration in Europe to 1997 positions when Russia and NATO signed the Founding Act.
I suspect ordinary people pray for peace, but unfortunately many in the Western “elite” are geographically far away and probably have no intention of fighting in this conflict. At the same time they are happy to gamble with other people’s lives for the sake of the “international order”.
Let me have your thoughts below and please don’t forget to circulate our material!
Alex Kriel is by training a physicist and was one of the first people to highlight the flawed nature of the Imperial COVID model4, he is a founder of the Thinking Coalition which comprises a group of citizens who are concerned about Government overreach (www.thinkingcoalition.com). For full disclosure, Alex Kriel has Russian familial ties.
3
Thinking Coalition
·
Mar 22
