By ANDREW KORYBKO*
Putin was faced with the choice of escalating or continuing his policy of strategic patience, and he chose the former.
Vladimir Putin surprised the world on Thursday when addressed the nation to report that Russia had tested a new medium-range hypersonic missile early that morning in an attack on a famous Soviet-era industrial complex in the Ukrainian city of Dnepropetrovsk. He explained that this was a response to the recent authorization by the United States and the United Kingdom for Ukraine to deploy its long-range missiles inside Russia. This decision allowed the proxy war between NATO and Russia in Ukraine to “take on elements of a global nature,” in his words.
As explained here Regarding the “moment of truth” to which this latest phase of the conflict has led, Putin found himself faced with the choice of escalation or continuing his policy of strategic patience, the former of which could frustrate Trump’s attempts to reach a peace agreement, while the latter could invite further aggression. He chose the former, and did so in a creative way that few anticipated. The Oreshnik missile system, whose existence was revealed on Thursday, is a Multiple Reentry and Independently Targeted Vehicle (MIRV).
It is essentially the same type of weapon that Russia could use in the event of a nuclear conflict with the West, since the aforementioned characteristic, coupled with its hypersonic speed, means that it is impossible to intercept. In other words, Vladimir Putin has rattled the Russian nuclear saber in the most convincing way possible, unless it tests a nuclear weapon, which his government has already confirmed it will not do for the reasons that have been explained. here. So he is finally climbing the ladder of climbing.
Vladimir Putin has so far refused to escalate in response to more than a thousand days of NATO-backed Ukrainian provocations, which have included bombing the Kremlin, early warning systems, strategic airfields, nuclear power plants and the Crimean bridge, among many other sensitive targets, in order to avoid World War III. He has also prioritized political objectives to the detriment of the military, but all that is changing now, since he realized that his strategic patience was interpreted as weakness and only attracted more aggression.
Given that Ukraine's latest use of Western weapons on Russian territory pre-2014 is not unprecedented, as HIMARS had already been used in the regions of Belgorod e Kursk, this last invaded by Ukraine with NATO support during the summer, the question arises as to why it took more than three months for their views to change. It should also be noted that Russia did not react significantly to the implementation of F-16s for Ukraine, despite Lavrov have previously warned that they could be equipped with nuclear weapons.
Russia may therefore have received information that the West is planning an even greater provocation in the future. Belarusian media have just broadcast a documentary which exposes a Western conspiracy to destabilize and invade their country, which readers can learn more about by reviewing the seven analyses that have been enumerated here. Correspondingly, it was assessed that “Russia's updated nuclear doctrine aims to deter unacceptable NATO provocations”, and what was stated above would certainly constitute such a step.
Vladimir Putin's strategic patience would have finally reached its limits if he had known something like this was coming, which would explain why he ordered the Oreshnik to be used against the Soviet-era industrial complex in central Ukraine in order to send an unequivocal message to the West to reconsider its plans. Given how concerned he is about avoiding World War III, it also makes sense that his spokesman confirmed that Russia informed the United States about this attack about half an hour in advance.
After all, the launch of an intermediate-range hypersonic missile westward without any prior warning could have caused the US to panic, interpreting it as the beginning of a potential nuclear first strike by Russia, thus setting in motion exactly the scenario it had worked so hard to avoid. Its motive was to dissuade the West from carrying out unacceptable provocations that would cross Russia’s most sensitive red lines, which the West might be plotting in desperation in order to “escalate to de-escalate,” as it put it.
It was written here, here e here Donald Trump could resort to this, but the latest escalation of the ATACMS – which could be considered a provocation, as these missiles have a much longer range than the HIMARS – suggests that the “Biden Collective” decided to do this first out of fear that any deal he could reach with Putin would compromise too many US interests. Putin may therefore have now decided to strike a blow at the US, “escalating to de-escalate”, but on Russia’s terms.
Thursday morning was the first time a MIRV was used in combat, which is far more significant than the US “boiling the frog” by expanding the range of missiles that Ukraine was already capable of deploying within pre-2014 Russian borders after once again having signaled their climbing plans well in advance, especially since few anticipated their use and the US only had about 30 minutes' notice. Putin also warned that Russia's new doctrine allows it to use these weapons against those arming Ukraine.
It is unlikely that he will throw caution to the wind and launch Oreshniks at military targets in NATO countries, risking triggering World War III, but it is not excluded that the next escalation he is considering in response to further aggression could be bombing Moldova. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zakharova said at the beginning of the week that the Western-backed government is “transforming the country, at an accelerated pace, into a logistics hub used to supply the Ukrainian armed forces.”
But Moldova is not a NATO member, so Russia could bomb it if they continue to provoke Putin even after Thursday’s escalation, without crossing the West’s red lines, while signaling that he is not the weakling they thought he was after misinterpreting the reasons for his strategic patience. They want him to accept the presence of Western/NATO peacekeeping forces along the Line of Contact (LOC), the continued militarization of Ukraine, its future membership in NATO, and the absence of changes to its anti-Russian legislation.
In return, Vladimir Putin wants the expulsion of Ukraine from the four regions that voted in favor of joining Russia in September 2022, the absence of Western/NATO peacekeeping forces along the LoC, the demilitarization of Ukraine, the restoration of its constitutional neutrality, and the repeal of its anti-Russian legislation. Therefore, striking the West by “escalating to de-escalate,” or at least finally climbing the ladder of escalation in response to its provocations, is aimed at hitting as many people as possible. of these maximum objectives.
If he stands firm and does not waver in his new approach, which is arguably long overdue, since some believe he should have started implementing it after the failure of the spring 2022 peace talks, then there is a much better chance of achieving at least part of the most important objectives. NATO can always intervene conventionally in Ukraine west of the Dnieper to safeguard part of its geopolitical project, in which case Russia must assume that it will not be able to demilitarize or denazify this part of the country.
What it can do, however, is employ military and diplomatic means (both individually and in combination through its new approach outlined above) to gain control of all the territory it claims as its own east of the Dnieper, possibly including the eponymous city of Zaporozhye, with over 700.000 inhabitants. The new LOC could then be patrolled by purely non-Western forces deployed under a UN mandate, while Ukraine could be coerced into demilitarizing everything that remains under its control east of the Dnieper.
All heavy weapons would have to be withdrawn to the west as part of a huge demilitarized zone (DMZ), and there would also be the possibility of this “Transdnieper” region being granted political autonomy or at least cultural autonomy to protect the rights of ethnic Russians and those who speak that language. This scenario was first put forward here in March and could take the form shown below, with the western part of the country in blue possibly hosting NATO troops as part of the arrangement to be described below.
Ukraine could be deterred from breaking the ceasefire because the DMZ puts it at a disadvantage, while Russia would be deterred by the “security guarantees” Ukraine has obtained this year from several NATO countries, which amount to de facto support under Article 5. While Russia could invade the DMZ, NATO could also invade western Ukraine or possibly cross the Dnieper, either through a quick intervention or because it has already deployed its troops west of the river by tacit agreement with Russia.
What has been detailed in the previous three paragraphs is the maximum that Russia can realistically achieve, given the new strategic-military circumstances in which it finds itself, more than 1000 days after the start of the special operation. Putin has finally started to climb the ladder of escalation to deter even greater provocations that the West might now be plotting with the intention of coercing him into freezing the existing LOC and then, possibly, accepting the deployment of Western/NATO peacekeeping forces there.
Such a scenario would be completely unacceptable to him, from the point of view of Russia’s national security interests and his own reputation, after he had promised to stop NATO’s expansion into Ukraine. However, keeping this bloc west of the Dnieper and demilitarizing everything east and north of the administrative borders of the four former Ukrainian regions that joined Russia in September 2022, provisionally known as the “Transdnieper” region, would be a tolerable compromise.
Donald Trump may consider this deal pragmatic enough to accept, since all parties to the conflict will see it as a victory (e.g., Russia gained ground and created a demilitarized zone inside Ukraine; Ukraine continued to exist as a state; and the US effectively incorporated Western Ukraine into NATO). It could come into effect even earlier, if either party “escalates to de-escalate” before he takes office, and this is the “mutually life-saving” compromise they would reach to avoid World War III.
Of course, it would be better if they reached this agreement without triggering a reckless Cuban-type crisis that risks spiraling out of control, so their diplomats should start discussing the matter now or have diplomats from a third country, like those in India, proposed it behind the scenes to get the ball rolling. Putin’s new (and no doubt long-awaited) approach indicates that he will not accept the freezing of the current LOC, nor especially the deployment of NATO/Western peacekeepers, and that he will escalate to prevent this.
He may even go so far as to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine (and/or the NATO logistics hub in Moldova) if he feels he is being cornered by the evolving circumstances the West may soon place him in through its possibly greater provocations (e.g. destabilizing and invading Belarus). The West must therefore start taking Vladimir Putin seriously after he has finally started climbing the escalation ladder, otherwise the worst-case scenario of World War III may become inevitable if they push him too far.
*Andrew Korybko holds a master's degree in International Relations from the Moscow State Institute of International Relations. Book author Hybrid Wars: From Color Revolutions to Coups (popular expression). [https://amzn.to/46lAD1d]
Translation: Fernando Lima das Neves.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
