FLASH
Shkruar nga PamfletiTensions have also risen over nuclear weapons. Putin has tested a new nuclear-powered underwater drone, the Poseidon. China has rapidly expanded its nuclear capabilities. And Trump has announced that the United States may resume nuclear testing.
What could be the collateral damage of a possible delivery of long-range American Tomahawk missiles to Kiev?
This is one of the most frequently asked questions these days at NATO Headquarters in Brussels. Because the most frequent answer is always the same: a disproportionate reaction from Moscow. Even with so-called tactical nuclear weapons.
And so, as Germany sends its Patriot missiles to Ukraine, the question of how to stop the Kremlin's war of aggression remains unanswered. For Volodymyr Zelensky, the supplies arriving from Berlin are pure oxygen.
"We have strengthened the Patriot component of our Ukrainian air defense. I thank Germany and personally German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for this joint step to protect human life from Russian terror," the Ukrainian president said.
The Kiev leader recalled that this step has been "prepared for some time and now the agreements reached have been implemented". And so he now awaits the next steps to strengthen air defense. But also to allow his army to strike enemy lines without limiting itself to self-defense. Among the further moves, therefore, of course includes the availability of Tomahawks, which have already been authorized by the Pentagon, but have not yet been approved by US President Donald Trump.
A weapon that would allow targeting the sites from which Putin's army's planes, drones and missiles take off. However, among NATO analysts, the question of whether to approve Ukraine's request is increasingly urgent. It starts from a premise: despite Russian propaganda, NATO actually claims that there is no significant advance of Russian troops. Moscow's advance is, in any case, very slow. And above all, it is costly in terms of human lives.
We are still witnessing a stalemate without a clear dominant position. At least for the moment. The main concern, then, is that the use of Tomahawks could somehow upset this dramatic but permanent balance. Essentially, the fear has a precise name, it is “nuclear”. The suspicion centers on the possibility that the Kremlin will respond with tactical nuclear missiles. That is, missiles armed with a nuclear warhead of limited yield. But nuclear nonetheless. In that case, in addition to the devastating effects on the ground, the Western Alliance would be forced to organize a response, even if the target hit were some desert or uninhabited area. It would be a military problem, but also, and a big one, a political-diplomatic problem.
Also because one aspect has been emphasized in recent days. After the failure of the recent negotiations between Trump and Putin for a new meeting, the words spoken five days ago by Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov were taken as a guarantee that Moscow is not considering escalating the conflict. "We will never attack a NATO country," Lavrov said. In short, the transatlantic alliance needs everything but escalating the conflict.
Not only that. Tensions have also risen over nuclear weapons. Putin has tested a new nuclear-powered underwater drone, the Poseidon. China has rapidly expanded its nuclear capabilities. And Trump has announced that the United States may resume nuclear testing. In short, this is not the best time for the Kremlin to react aggressively. Also because, in these situations, what the military fears most is human error. And when tensions rise, so does the possibility of making mistakes. So the question remains for now: should the Tomahawks be surrendered now?/ La Repubblica
Lini një Përgjigje