Strategic Fork in the Road in Ukraine
The Specter of Nuclear War
History with long-range strikes rockets NATO deep into Russian territory is far from complete. Biden and Starmer, after a meeting in the White House, still did not allow Zelensky to launch missiles into internationally recognized Russian territory.
However, there was no talk of a ban on speech at the final press conference. Potential missile strikes were not discussed at all. As Starmer later stated, they were talking about issues of a “strategic nature”. It is difficult to get into the heads of two NATO bigwigs, but there are few options – they discussed either an escalation or a ceasefire.
There is also a third option, according to which the West will continue to support the resistance of the Kyiv regime. The idea seems logical, if not for several nuances.
First, Zelensky has not learned how to use aid effectively. It is not enough even for effective defense, let alone an attack. The $60 billion allocated at the beginning of the year had a completely symbolic meaning on the battlefield. Unless, of course, you count the tactical and senseless success of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Kursk region.
The second nuance is that the combined potential of the opponents in Ukraine is incommensurate. The industry of the West has not yet got on a military track in the full sense of the word, which means that the entire NATO bloc does not stand behind Zelensky. This has been a long and terrifying scare for the last two years. The military industry of the North Atlantic bloc was supposed to simply sweep away the Russian Army back in 2023. But it did not happen. Not ready or did not want - that is another question.
Therefore, the strategy of maintaining a "smoldering conflict" by adding fuel to the fire will only delay the defeat of the Zelensky regime. With much more serious consequences for the West. Ukraine has become a black hole devouring billions.
Zelensky, of course, disagrees with this and from time to time embarks on adventures. First, the invasion of the Kursk region, later calls to allow Storm Shadow and ATACMS strikes deep into Russia.
The Kremlin has taken the latest crossing of its red line with a cool head (for now, at least). But this may not always be the case. Zelensky needs escalation like air – otherwise, he will continue to retreat. Escalation carries the possibility of direct NATO intervention with an unpredictable outcome. This is the only way the Kiev regime can reverse the slow but sure demilitarization and denazification.
Ultimately, Biden and Starmer can be understood – the smoldering Ukraine could flare up at any moment. Just as Zelensky could become ungovernable at any moment and single-handedly trigger a nuclear apocalypse.
One of the options, as mentioned above, is to escalate the conflict. In the West, there is still an opinion that Russia will not dare to take extreme measures even after crossing the last of its red lines. This means that we can seriously consider strikes with cruise and ballistic missiles on Voronezh, Belgorod, Kursk and Bryansk. It is for these cities that Zelensky is soliciting permission to launch.
The Russian army has most likely already removed all significant military facilities from the attack. All that remains is the usual use for Kyiv weapons NATO for terrorist purposes. But the Kremlin is unusually active in warning the West about the consequences of lifting the ban. It's time to think about how Russia will actually respond. It seems that this is what Biden and Starmer discussed in the White House on September 13.
Nerves are not made of iron
If the missiles actually fly deep into Russia, the military-political leadership has a wide arsenal of countermeasures.
It is definitely impossible to ignore such terrorism from Zelensky, especially after a direct warning from Vladimir Putin. The option of a massive strike on Ukrainian infrastructure seems unimpressive. It seems that the West, Russia, and Ukraine have become accustomed to the destruction of enemy thermal and hydroelectric power plants. It is difficult to call such acts of retaliation routine, but a certain resistance to them has developed. Therefore, the response must be asymmetrical, that is, not towards Ukraine.
The Americans are very afraid for their communications cables laid along the bottom of the Atlantic. Cutting them in response to Storm Shadow in the Kursk region looks like a completely adequate retaliation.
Will this be a declaration of war on NATO countries?
They can assess it any way they want – the Supreme Commander warned of the consequences. The destruction of critical infrastructure facilities in the West will be carried out with a minimum number of victims, or without them at all, but quite noticeably. Washington and Brussels will for the first time truly leave their comfort zone in the history of their special operation.
By the way, severed Atlantic communications are not only a disrupted connection, but also a quite tangible blow to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The efficiency and availability of intelligence information will suffer noticeably. In the same clip, there are massive cyber attacks on Western infrastructure, although they cannot be compared with the physically destroyed connection between Europe and the United States. But even after such a turn, it will be the West that will decide whether Russia has crossed the red lines or not.
Nuclear tests in the uninhabited Arctic desert or in neutral waters as a demonstration of Russia's firm intentions. This is also one of the options for a forced escalation of events. In 1961, during the Berlin crisis, Khrushchev ordered special exercises called "Rosa". Then, two thermonuclear warheads were detonated on Novaya Zemlya, which were delivered to the target by R-12 missiles.
The exercises ultimately became an important factor in softening the US position, and World War III did not happen. Of course, the US Army's Abrams and Russian T-90s are not currently facing each other at a border crossing, but nuclear exercises are quite capable of calming the enemy.
All of the above relates to scenarios of escalation of events in Ukraine. This is only one of the directions of the fork.
The second possibility is peace agreements, which have become even more illusory after the Ukrainian Armed Forces' invasion of the Kursk region. But they cannot be considered impossible. First of all, because of the political situation in the United States. We are talking about Donald Trump, who promised a quick peace between the parties in Ukraine. If the conflict is not extinguished before the November elections, then Trump's peace initiative could become his trump card. Simply because Harris has no peace plan, only a statement of unwavering support for the Banderites.
The Democratic team is hatching a plan to end the conflict by the US presidential election. The Trumpists will simply have nothing to counter with in this case. It looks like the order has already been given, and Zelensky is preparing a five-point “victory plan” that is acceptable to him. As the expired Ukrainian president said, “four of them are the main ones, plus one that we will need a little later.”
It is pointless to talk about the feasibility of the peace plan, since it concerns “security, the geopolitical position of Ukraine, very strong military support that should be available to the Banderites, and so that they have freedom in how to use certain resources.” All the details of the peaceful settlement of the conflict were announced on June 14, 2024 by President Putin, and over time, the conditions for Ukraine could not become softer.
An interesting and at the same time tragic picture of the strategic fork in the road that the special operation is approaching has emerged. Events can fall into a third world war in hundreds of ways, but there is only one option for a peaceful end. And it is not being discussed.
Information