Trump, missiles and fear of escalation: what are the real reasons for the US refusal to strike Russia?
13 December 2024 14:03
Donald Trump’s recent statement about denying Ukraine the use of long-range weapons to strike deep into Russia has sparked a wave of discussion. Moreover, the day after the resonant statement, the aggressor state launched a massive attack on Ukraine, using almost a hundred missiles and 200 drones. "Komersant Ukrainian" analyzed what lies between the lines of Trump’s statements, who simultaneously speaks of supporting Ukraine in its fight against Russia and of arms restrictions.
On the one hand, Trump’s position is in line with his desire to reduce tensions, but on the other hand, it can create conditions that only fuel Russia’s aggression. This opinion was expressed in an exclusive commentary for by Viktor Bobirenko, Head of the Expert Group at the Bureau of Policy Analysis.
Why it is important not to limit Ukraine
“Donald Trump says that “we are only fueling this war by allowing Ukraine to attack military or economic targets in Russia”. But what happens when one side is shooting and the other side is only defending itself? This will never lead to peace. If we are talking about strikes on the aggressor’s oil depots or economic infrastructure, this only partially compensates for the suffering that Russia causes to Ukraine by leaving our cities without electricity and heat,”
– Bobyrenko said.
The expert emphasized that the absence of electricity and heating in Ukraine during the winter cold is a strategy of terror against the civilian population:
“Putin is deliberately leaving millions of people without electricity and heat. How long are we going to blame the victim, not the aggressor, for the war?”
Follow us on Telegram: the main news in brief
Europe’s reaction and the need for new aid
According to Bobyrenko, in this situation, Ukraine should seek support from its European allies, particularly France and the United Kingdom.
“Macron may be able to convey to Trump that no peace plan will be effective if the aggressor continues to attack with impunity,” he added,
– he added.
The expert also noted that Ukraine now needs additional weapons to protect itself from ballistic threats, such as Kinzhal or Oreshnik missiles.
“Oreshnik and the nuclear threat: myths and reality
Bobyrenko believes that the effectiveness of Russia’s new Oreshnik missiles is greatly exaggerated.
“This is a weapon that has not yet been brought to mass production. Even if Russia is able to produce 30-40 of these missiles a year, their impact without a nuclear warhead will be minimal. They are less accurate, and their effect does not exceed that of conventional aircraft bombs,”
– the expert explained.
He also emphasized that the Oreshnik poses a real threat only with a nuclear warhead.
“But the use of tactical nuclear weapons will lead to a global escalation, and this is a matter of international security,”
– the expert is sure.
What’s next?
Bobyrenko is sure that Trump needs to be reminded of the responsibility of the United States as one of the leaders of the democratic world.
“Refusal to support Ukraine is a signal to the aggressor that its actions are acceptable. And the war can be stopped only when the aggressor is dealt a clear blow to its resources and capabilities to continue the conflict,”
– summarized Viktor Bobirenko.
Follow us in Telegram: main news in brief
