Reply With QuoteTbh the signs around Putin's intentions have always been there but those voices of warning by some in the West -and from within Russia itself-were always over-ridden by governments more concerned with trying to establish trade agreements and avoiding the potential of a second Cold War. Given the general fatigue for costly and largely unsuccessful military entanglements in Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan this was may be understandable. Russia's actions in Ukraine have at last caused many in the West to re-evaluate however and the most recent US delegation to Kyiv together with more recent comments from other NATO countries demonstrate a much harder line is now being taken.
Putin has been playing a game of brinkmanship for a long time now and has relied on the West being wary of provoking him in order to advance his aims but the situation in Ukraine has been a major wake up call. Dreadful as the destruction and war crimes committed in Ukraine are, to allow Putin success there has far wider implications than for Europe alone. His actions threaten global food and energy supplies and hence the global economy and undermine the authority (what little it still has) of the UN and of NATO. How the West responds may also influence how China proceeds with its own designs on Taiwan and the South China Sea.
The West has been wary of provoking Putin lest he makes good on his veiled threats about the use of nuclear or chemical weapons but we are past this point now. I agree that NATO forces should not (yet) be deployed in Ukraine as Putin could legitimately sell this as an act of direct aggression towards Russia even though this is deflection from his invasion of a sovereign country. Currently Putin is now threatening that the ramping up of the supply of weapons alone by the West to Ukraine is an act of aggression and will lead to a third world war but this is going to be a harder sell to the Russian population. Moreover, it is the typical response of a bully to threaten further escalation when the reality is quite different.
Events in Ukraine and the bravery of Ukrainians have highlighted the weaknesses of Russia's conventional armed forces which have sustained unanticipated heavy losses and rely too much on conscripts and mercenaries and now is the time to exploit this and-short of direct action- go all out to support Ukraine to drive Russian forces back. Of course this runs the risk of Putin making good on his rhetoric but whilst he may be deluded enough to think this may be a good idea it is very doubtful that many others in the Kremlin or the majority of the Russian population would. The key would be that NATO does not first decide to deploy its forces directly against Russia and that any direct confrontation is begun by Putin so that it is clear that Putin is the instigator and any claims otherwise are seen by the world for what they are-deflection for his invasion of a sovereign country.
Putin must not be allowed success in Ukraine not only for the sake of Ukrainians but for the sake of both European and global stability.
