The disastrous decision to expand NATO eastwards, and to try to include Ukraine in it, always created the strategic risk of a general war in Europe. NATO's current actions are turning that strategic threat into a short-term one.
By John Ross
Most world attention has recently naturally been focussed on the U.S./Israel war against Iran. But simultaneously, if less widely noticed, in Europe an increasingly serious military situation has been developing around Ukraine, the dynamic of which seriously threatens the risk of escalation from a “regional” conflict to a general European war.
This is not only a major development itself but, together with other developments, shows that the U.S. is escalating its international military aggression despite its setbacks in the first round of its war against Iran.
The immediate origins of this very dangerous dynamic in Europe can be traced to a May 2024 decision by NATO states to sanction the use of missiles they supplied, and also drones, for long distance strikes into Russia. In reality, such long-range strikes cannot be launched without NATO countries’ military guidance and intelligence system systems actively aiding Ukraine’s command and control functions. Therefore, NATO, in fact, is participating in, and essential to, carrying out military attacks deep inside Russia – as serious military analysts know.
The claim that this escalation is only by European countries and not by the U.S. will not stand up to serious examination, The entire military command and control, satellite surveillance, intelligence and targeting system of NATO is operationally under the control of the U.S.. Ukraine could not carry out these attacks without direct involvement of NATO, and NATO, in turn, could not act without the participation of the U.S.. Claims to the contrary are fiction.
Initially, after the May 2024 decision, fortunately, possibly because military production of missiles and drones in NATO countries had not yet been ramped up, these long distance strikes were little more than pinpricks, which Russia could in practice ignore. But in recent months the scale of European weapons production, and of these attacks, has been ramped up in terms of attacks on Russian cities, ports and production facilities. Such attacks are now taking place in Central Russia (Ryazan, Kapoitnya, Nizhny Novgorod, Syzran, Yaroslavl), in Urals (Perm) and increasingly in North-Western Russia (Kirishi, Tuapse, Novorossiysk, Grushovaya).
These latter attacks have aroused particular discussion in Russia as St Petersburg, the centre of the region, is 1,600 kilometres from Kyiv. It is argued there, and outside, that it is not possible for Ukrainian drones to fly 1,600 kilometres across Russia without being detected, and they are instead being permitted to fly across Poland and the Baltic states before entering Russian airspace. This being true, would make those countries direct participants in the war.
The Baltic States have admitted that drones involved in the attacks on Northwest Russia have been in their airspace but have argued that they did not give permission for this. Whatever view is taken of the truth of such claims and counter-claims, it has inevitably led to an extremely tense situation in Northwest Russia, with the governor of the Northwest region of Leningrad, Alexander Drozdenko, declaring that the region has become a “frontline” one.
Jeffrey Sach has even stated that he regards the situation which this creates with the Baltic States as the “most dangerous place” in the world – an apparently extreme claim, but the logic of which is considered below.
In addition to these increasing attacks, Ukraine has made a number of threats and actions which can only be regarded as extreme provocations.
One was a threat by Zelensky to attempt to militarily attack the 9 May parade in Moscow celebrating the victory over Nazi Germany. To realise the significance of that, not only is 9 May the most solemn day in the Russian calendar but it is the day it is known with certainty that both Vladimir Putin and foreign leaders will be in Red Square.
The Russian Ministry of Defence replied by taking the extreme step of publicly warning foreign diplomats and citizens to evacuate Kyiv, threatening a massive, immediate retaliatory missile strike on the centre of the Ukrainian capital if the Moscow parade was attacked. This Ukrainian provocation was so extreme that even the US de facto explicitly vetoed it by forcing Zelensky to declare a ceasefire covering 9 May.
Even more shocking to Russian public opinion was on 21-22 May an attack on Starobilsk, a city in the Russian-speaking part of the Luhansk Oblast in eastern Ukraine, killing at least 21 people, the great majority of whom were young women students. This led to an inevitable Russian retaliation against Kyiv, reportedly led by its Oreshnik hypersonic missile.
The extremely dangerous escalatory logic of the May 2024 NATO decision to strike deep inside Russia, after the initial delay in its implementation, is therefore clear, widely discussed inside Russia and increasingly outside. This is that it is militarily irrational for Russia to stay passive while NATO countries produce and pass unhindered increasing quantities of weapons to Ukraine to attack inside Russia, and that it is more logical and effective to militarily attack not only Kyiv’s military launching centres but the European countries weapon production facilities. That is, the passing of NATO’s attacks deep inside Russia from pinpricks to a mounting campaign is creating the risk of a general European war.
Sergey Karaganov, Honorary Chairman of Russia’s Council on Foreign and Defence Policy, and a foreign policy advisor to Putin, Yeltsin, and Gorbachev, has argued that Russia, to prevent these attacks on it, must launch attacks against European infrastructure and military production facilities, that is against NATO countries, and that Russia must lower its threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons.
The disastrous decision to expand NATO eastwards, and to try to include Ukraine in it, always created the strategic risk of a general war in Europe. NATO’s current actions are turning that strategic threat into a short-term one.
Turning to the general context, in parallel with this dangerous escalation of the war against Russia, the U.S. is stepping up its threats against Cuba. In short, as regards the international situation, the U.S. has suffered a defeat in the first rounds of the war against Iran. But it is intensifying its military aggression internationally.