NATO members met in Brussels last week to discuss how far they should go in supplying Ukraine with military equipment.
The challenge for NATO throughout this war has been how to give Ukraine enough military support to defend itself, but without getting drawn into the conflict and finding itself in war with Russia.
The Ukrainian government has been explicit in its orders for help.
If you want to have any chance of defend against the upcoming Russian assault on the Donbass region in the east of the country, Ukraine says, then it urgently needs the West to supply it with more of the anti-tank weapons and anti-aircraft missiles than its forces have been using in this war.
But Ukraine wants more.
- Six weeks of devastation and resistance in Ukraine while the rest of the world tries to li deal with the effects of the conflict
Wants tanks, fighter jets, drones and advanced missile air defense systems to counter Russia’s increasing use of air strikes and long-range missiles, with which they are constantly depleting Ukraine’s strategic fuel reserves and other essentials.
So, many people may wonder, what exactly is What is holding NATO back?
The answer is the escalation of the conflict.
The risk of Russia resorting to the use of tactical (i.e. short-range) nuclear weapons or of the conflict spreading beyond the borders of Ukraine towards a European war m broader, it is constantly on the minds of Western leaders, and the stakes are high.
What the West has given Ukraine so far
- More of 30 countries have provided military aid to Ukraine, including €1,000 million euros from the European Union and $1,700 million United States dollars
- Supplies, which so far they have been limited to weapons, ammunition and defensive equipment, co mo anti-tank and anti-aircraft missile systems
- That includes the “javelins”, which are shoulder-carried weapons fired at tanks that launch heat-tracing rockets
- Also includes Stingers (stingers), which are the man-portable anti-aircraft weapons most used in Afghanistan against Soviet aircraft
- And the Starstreak, a portable defense system aircraft manufactured in the United Kingdom
NATO members fear that the supply of equipment heavier offensive weapons, such as tanks and fighter jets, could lead to open and direct conflict with Russia.
That is not has prevented the Czechs from delivering tanks T.
Nuclear Taboo
President Putin reminded the world from the beginning of this war that Russia is a nuclear weapons power, and that it was raising the level of readiness of its nuclear deterrence system.
The United States did not do the same, as it did not detect any movement of Russian nuclear warheads out of its storage bunkers.
But Putin’s argument was clear: “Russia has a massive nuclear arsenal, so don’t think they can pressure us “.
Russian military doctrine allows early use of low-yield tactical nuclear warheads, knowing that The West abhors nuclear weapons, which have not been used during 11 years.
NATO strategic planners are concerned that once the nuclear taboo is broken, even if the damage is limited to a localized target on the battlefield of Ukraine, the risk of escalating to a catastrophic nuclear exchange between Russia and the West will inevitably increase.
Still, with each atrocity apparently committed by Russian soldiers, NATO’s resolve hardens and its inhibitions melt away.
Czech Republic has already sent tanks. It is the first NATO country to do so, even though they are obsolete T11 from the Soviet era.
Slovakia is sending its air defense missile systems S300. Both moves would have seemed risky at the start of this war.
Some possible scenarios
Tobias Ellwood, the UK parliamentarian who chairs the Parliamentary Defense Committee, is one of those who believes that Putin is making a bluff when he raises the scenario of nuclear weapons and that NATO should do more.
“We have been too cautious about the weapons systems we have been willing to provide,” he says. “We need a firmer attitude. We are giving the Ukrainians enough to survive but not enough to win and that must change”.
- Which countries in Europe are neutral and why (and what Ukraine could learn from their experiences)
Then , what would make this war between Russia and Ukraine turn into a pan-European conflict involving NATO?
There are a number of possible scenarios that will undoubtedly occupy the minds of Western defense ministries.
Here are just three of them:
one. A NATO-supplied anti-ship missile is fired by Ukrainian forces in Odessa, sinking a Russian warship in the Black Sea. They almost die 11 sailors and dozens of marines. A death toll of this magnitude in a single attack would be unprecedented and Putin would be under pressure to respond.
two. A Russian strategic missile attack targets a military hardware supply convoy crossing from a NATO country, such as Poland or Slovakia, into Ukraine. If casualties were to occur on the NATO side of the border, that could trigger Article 5 of the NATO constitution, bringing the entire alliance to the defense of the attacked country.
3. In the midst of fierce fighting in the Donbás, an explosion occurs at an industrial facility, causing the release of toxic chemical gases. While this has already occurred, no deaths were reported. But if it resulted in the number of mass deaths that there was in a poison gas attack in Ghouta, Syria, in 2013, and if it were found to be deliberately caused by Russian forces, then NATO would be forced to answer.
Control escalation
It is perfectly possible that none of these scenarios will materialize.
But while Western nations have shown an unusual degree of unity in the strength of their reaction against the Russian invasion, there are allegations that they are simply being reactive and not thinking about what the end result should be
“The biggest strategic question”, says one of the most experienced British military officers who asks not to be identified, “is whether our government is involved in crisis management or real strategy”. That would require thinking this through to the end, he adds.
“What we are trying to achieve here is to give Ukraine all the help we can, except for World War III. The problem is that Putin is a better poker player than us”.
MP Tobias Ellwood agrees.
“Russia does this very effectively. And we are scared. We have lost the ability to control the escalation“.
Remember that you can receive notifications from BBC Mundo. Download the new version of our app and activate it so you don’t miss our best content.
- Do you already know our YouTube channel? Subscribe!