.jpg){kind=link}
Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu warned that Ukraine may attempt to use Western-supplied Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles and longer-range HIMARS ground-based rockets to strike Russian facilities in Crimea.
His warning came at a meeting of the collegium of the Russian Ministry of Defense on Tuesday.
Shoigu said that the use of such weapons outside the zone of the special military operation would induce immediate Russian strikes on “decision-making centers in Ukraine” and would “mean the full involvement of the United States and the United Kingdom in the conflict.”
Sputnik spoke with two veterans of the US foreign policy apparatus about Shoigu’s report, why Kiev might resort to such actions, and what the Western response is likely to be. They said Western approval was implied by having helped Kiev plan its counteroffensive and that NATO powers are likely to dismiss Moscow's warnings as bluster, despite evidence to the contrary. In the end, such a strike will only make a full-blown Russia-NATO war more likely.
‘Desperate’ Kiev Trying to ‘Provoke’ Moscow
Earl Rasmussen, an international consultant and retired US Army lieutenant colonel, compared such a potential attack to other “actions of desperation” by Ukraine outside the scope of the conventional military conflict in Donbass.
“We had the Kerch Bridge blown up; we had the attempted drone attack on the Kremlin; we've got the assassinations; we have the destruction of the dam. These are terrorist actions. These are actions of desperation, I think.”
Rasmussen suggested a threat against Crimea would be aimed at “trying to instill fear of some type in the Russian population” and pressure Moscow to withdraw its forces.
“But also obviously, it's for a public relations perspective as well. I think they're trying to demonstrate some type of success or positive - from their perspective positive - prior to the NATO meetings coming up in a couple of weeks,” he noted.
Meanwhile, Larry Johnson, a retired CIA intelligence officer and former US State Department official, similarly described Ukraine’s position as “a situation of great desperation” and characterized such a potentially audacious strike as an attempt to bring NATO into the conflict directly.
“Nothing that they have planned from a military standpoint has worked in terms of their counteroffensive. I think what they want to do is try to provoke Russia into taking actions that will then bring NATO into the conflict directly. So they're looking for a pretext to create an avenue,” he said.
NATO’s Approval Implied by Supplies
Rasmussen said that the United States would “not openly” approve of Ukraine using Western weaponry to attack Crimea, but noted that its “tacit approval” was implied by Washington’s position that Crimea is still a part of Ukraine and that the 2014 declaration of independence and subsequent referendum on being rejoined to the Russian Federation were not legitimate.
“I don't know if they actually were supportive of the strikes on Moscow and the assassinations, although there seems to be evidence that there was some type of Western intelligence collaboration there,” Rasmussen continued. “But as far as strikes on Crimea, they may not openly announce it, but yes, you know, they're providing targeting information. I'm sure the targeting information is being provided by the West, by NATO, primarily the UK and the US.”
He further noted that Ukraine “will need to get closer to hit Crimea directly. Perhaps through two defense lines. [It is] doubtful they will be able to but [they] may try.”
Johnson added that “NATO and the United States want to see Russia destroyed and broken up. You should no longer labor under the illusion that the West somehow wants to find a way to peacefully coexist with Russia.”
Rasmussen likewise noted that the West should have realized by now that “both Russia and China do not bluff” and that Moscow will follow through on its threat to strike decision-making centers in Ukraine in the event of a Storm Shadow or HIMARS missile strike outside the special operation zone.
“They may be cautious and they're not completely destructive like the NATO countries are when they go into countries unprovoked, like Libya, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Serbia, and Iraq, but they are deliberate. And so they should take caution that, yes, those decision-making centers” will be hit, he said.
‘Rapidly Spin Out of Control’
“It's interesting that Shoigu said ‘in Ukraine’. So he's trying to limit, I think, Putin and Shoigu are trying to not to escalate this to a direct NATO confrontation, but I’ll tell you, the NATO countries do seem to be almost trying to provoke that type of an action, indirectly, so they can say that they didn't do it. So I think decision-making centers inside Ukraine are fair game and if they're not realizing this and understanding what this is going to do, I don't know what world they're living in,” Rasmussen said.
“I think they're going to be cautious to hit anything outside of Ukraine. But let's face it, no matter what they say, the US and the UK especially, are participants in this. Almost not quite directly, but pretty much, pretty close. And they probably have special operations and intelligence assets that are in Ukraine, that are assisting the Ukrainians command,” he added.
Rasmussen noted that US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland “admitted” in congressional testimony that the US has been actively assisting Ukraine in planning the counteroffensive for several months. That, however, doesn’t mean that Russia would strike a NATO country, although it is “definitely an escalation.”
“I think primarily the UK and the US are the ones driving this. There's disagreement, I think, within several members on the NATO side and caution. So I don't think they've got full support in the background. But right now they don't need that. They can continue to have Ukraine as the sacrificial lamb, as a proxy there,” Rasmussen said.
For his part, Johnson warned that the risk of escalation is “very severe.”
“I think the actions in the Biden White House are intent upon going to war. I hope that doesn't happen. But up to this point, the United States over the years has enjoyed the luxury of being safe and secure in its own territory. And I think this thing could rapidly spin out of control.”
Johnson predicted Ukraine’s Western sponsors would ignore Shoigu’s words and “dismiss it as more bombast from Russia.”
“They've been using these missiles all along anyway. They've been trying to target Crimea all along over the past at least six-seven months. And I know that Russia's air defense has been effective in defeating the attempted launches,” Johnson said, adding that “this may indicate that Shoigu has some intelligence indicating that Ukraine is planning to do something that it has not done in the past.”
Johnson reiterated that “Russia has to defend itself,” noting that the country “has been under unrelenting attack now for more than nine years, starting in 2014 with the direct intervention of the United States and Great Britain in the Maidan coup.”
“And then [came] the ensuing civil war in the Donbass and the continued attacks on civilians that were tolerated and not condemned by the West,” the former State Department official explained. “And then on top of that, with the actions that the United States in particular has taken by deploying its troops to Romania and Poland and deploying missile batteries that could potentially carry nuclear weapons.”
“I think, if Russia was doing those kinds of things to the United States on the borders of the United States, let's say in Mexico and Canada, the United States would view it as an act of war. So I think Russia's reactions are entirely understandable,” he pointed out.