Russia-Ukraine War: The Russian invasion of Ukraine nine months ago seems far from over, and now Western analysts estimate that “the red lines of the Russian president, Vladimir Putinhave changed in light of the failures on the battlefield, and a degree of desperation is evident in him.” As a result, diplomats in the West stated that “President Rossi’s threats must be taken seriously, including his threat that he would be ready to use nuclear weapons in the near field in Ukraine.”
In the meantime, Russia increased its attacks in Ukraine in recent weeks, when it sent tens of thousands more soldiers towards the front lines, and repeated attacks on civilian energy facilities, such as the electricity grid, which led to unrest in part of the country. Military analysts said that “the goal is to damage Ukrainian morale, by freezing the population during the winter, and thus to further increase the costs of Western support in Kiev, and to show the Russians that the war continues in full force.”
Putin’s “red lines” were sometimes heard as “delusional”, and part of his belligerent rhetoric. The Russian president warned last September that the Kremlin was ready to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, and said that Russia would use “all available means to protect Russia and its people.” Moscow also accused Ukraine of working to produce a “dirty bomb,” a move that Western officials say is intended to justify the escalation of attacks across the country.
The war in Ukraine (Photo: Reuters)The threats, according to the analysts, are intended to sow panic among the West, thereby convincing the governments to stop financial support to Ukraine and to push for negotiation talks on Russia’s terms. So far, Russia’s threats do not appear to have affected Western support for Ukraine.
Western analysts claim that the use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield will not advance Russia’s military goals, and it will risk the entry of the US and its allies into the depth of the war. Breaking the nuclear taboo, since 1945, will also result in international isolation and further condemnation of Moscow. Christopher Yu, expert Leghrein from the National Institute for Strategic Studies at the University of Nebraska, said that “I think that kind of escalation will not benefit Russia, especially under the current circumstances.”
Also, regarding the grain agreement, the West says that if Moscow is determined to collapse it, it may succeed, because Western companies will at some point stop insuring ships that may be attacked in the region. This, after earlier this month, Varissa agreed to extend the agreement by another 120 days. In another U-turn, Moscow canceled its conditions for the extension of the deal and demanded the easing of sanctions from the West, and the reopening of the pipeline that allows the export of Russian ammonia to the Black Sea. At the same time, it seems that Putin’s warning to annex more Ukrainian territories seems weak from reality. The liberation of the city of Kherson from the hands of the Russian army actually highlighted the gap between the Kremlin’s threats and the results on the ground.