Tensions between Russia and the West have intensified as Moscow ramps up its rhetoric in response to discussions around allowing Ukraine to use Western-supplied long-range missiles against Russian targets.
Senior Russian officials, including those close to Vladimir Putin, are now calling for a demonstration of nuclear power to send a clear warning to NATO.
With the possibility of Ukraine deploying British Storm Shadow missiles and American ATACMS against targets inside Russia, Russian hardliners have suggested nuclear tests as a form of deterrence.
Andrei Kolesnik, a leading Russian politician, has urged the Kremlin to lift its moratorium on nuclear testing. “We need to carry out a nuclear explosion somewhere, at some testing ground,” he said, suggesting that such a move would make the West rethink its involvement. “If we lift the moratorium, maybe humanity will think twice.”
Russia’s concept of “red lines” has been a recurring theme in its foreign policy, particularly since the invasion of Ukraine. Putin has repeatedly warned that any Western involvement in long-range missile strikes on Russian soil would lead to a significant escalation in the conflict.
He recently stressed that allowing Ukraine to target Russian territory would “significantly change the nature of the conflict” and could lead to direct war with NATO. “It would mean that NATO countries are at war with Russia,” Putin warned, raising the stakes considerably.
Western leaders, including UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and U.S. President Joe Biden, are carefully weighing their options as they decide how far to extend military support for Ukraine. The Storm Shadow missile, which has a range of over 150 miles, and the ATACMS missile, capable of reaching 190 miles, have already been effective in hitting Russian targets in Crimea and occupied eastern Ukraine. However, until now, their use has been limited to avoid provoking a severe Russian response.
Pressure on Biden to act is growing, particularly after Russia’s increased missile strikes on Ukrainian cities using precision-guided bombs. Ukrainian officials have consistently argued that they should be able to retaliate against Russian attacks launched from within Russia’s borders. But the West has so far resisted crossing that line, fearing the potential consequences of provoking Moscow.
While Putin’s threats of nuclear retaliation have often been dismissed as bluster, Western leaders must now decide whether they are prepared to test these red lines. Putin has not followed through on similar warnings in the past, even as NATO-supplied tanks and fighter jets were sent to Ukraine. However, the prospect of long-range missiles targeting Russian soil introduces a new level of uncertainty.
The situation is further complicated by Iran’s continued support for Russia, with reports of Tehran supplying short-range ballistic missiles to aid Russian attacks on Ukraine. This international dimension has led to questions about whether Ukraine should be permitted to strike back inside Russia with Western backing.
Starmer and Biden discussed these issues during recent talks in Washington, but no firm decision was reached. A final call may be made at the upcoming United Nations General Assembly later this month, as leaders consider the implications of further escalating the conflict.
For now, Russia’s red lines—often seen as tactical bluffs to slow down Western aid—are being tested as never before. Whether the West will call Putin’s bluff or back down to avoid a broader conflict is a decision that could reshape the future of the war in Ukraine.
Using Putin logic, many of Ukraines weapons are Russian….so Russia should attack itself as well as NATO…..🤔😉
Russia considers Crimea and Donbas as Russian territory. So the Russian position is (as usual) contradictory. Putin says that using western weapons to strike internationally recognised Russian territory is an escalation. But western weapons have long been used to strike Crimea and Donbas which Putin considers to be Russia.
The mouth says one thing while the brain thinks another. It appears not all of Russia has the same importance in Russian political circles
Plus he uses Russian, Chinese, Iranian & North Korean weapons against UKR, as well as foriegn mercenaries.
There is a much easier solution. Helping Ukraine make its own long range weapons quickly. Its grom missile was almost finished. It has Neptune anti ship missile that should provide knowledge to make land attack weapons. With a few bits of internals, help with plans and setting up production this would be a much better long term solution.
As well as make sure it had the ammunition and supplies to fight in its own territory.
I thought the same thing, 2 and a half years we could have helped them in that regard with their own developments.
Ignore Russia, let them set off some horrendous nuke on their won soil; pay no attention. Seriously it is not like the West doesn’t already know EXACTLY what Russia has in its armoury.
Moscow hardliners putting Putin under pressure? Raise or fold?
If the West/NATO back down on this matter and also abandon support for Ukraine if clown Trump is re-elected will mean all western foreign policies and promises will mean nothing for years to come. After all our leaders keep saying ‘as long as it takes’.
It will be a massive diplomatic failure for NATO and will allow Putin more or less free reign on further action. China will also take note of the lack of western long term resolve to support friends.
Exactly 👍
Absolutely and client nations will flock to sign up and BRICS will reach new levels of influence. Meanwhile MAGA and its second coming think they can just sit back behind a wall and watch it all happen without severe internal consequences. Still think that Trump can’t help but think about how that first time America was ‘great’ was off of a War centred in Europe.
Predict that there will be no change in US foreign policy re long range precision weaps targeted w/in pre-war Russian border before 5 Nov 24. Democrats do not desire UKR conflict to become a major issue in the upcoming election. Absolutely no clue re US policy post 5 Nov; willing to wager that very few w/in Uncle Sugar’s bureaucracy similarly have absolute certainty re policy.
Do wonder whether the US and UK have developed a good cop/bad cop routine as an interim measure. UK has repeatedly been the stalking horse for changes in weapon policy during this conflict. Once again into the breach? Really would strongly recommend HMG demand robust US supplied GBAD as an at least interim measure; one fine day Mad Vlad will enforce a red line, quite probably w/out further notice.
Apparently the reason the US has a veto on our weapons is because if used it ‘could’ bring NATO into a war with Russia! They can only be used with the permission of SACEUR an American and who does he answer too?
I agree with nothing happening before the election, post election should the Democrats win it will be a different story.
You’ve also got the potential that announcement of any given permission would happen as soon as possible before the first strike using the weapons. No point in announcing it well before the Ukrainians are ready to commit their first attack.
Largely Putins argument (according to what he recently said on Russian TV) on this seems to be that Ukraine doesn’t have military satellites required for these kind of weapons, meaning that they’d have to rely on NATO satellites and data for targeting solutions etc. Making it direct NATO involvement. Not sure this argument really stands, I don’t know enough about how Storm Shadow / ATACMS work. I know Storm Shadow uses a built in IR camera to confirm the target but not sure how the imagery for that is sourced.
The problem is we forever refer to them as British weapons which is major PR failing. Once they are handed to Ukraine they are Ukraine’s weapon’s end of. If its to do with donating them then simples…. give Ukraine a loan then right it off after the war, the loan then funds weapon purchases from UK. We really need to get better at this.