[/QUOTE]
The global balance is walking a tightrope, as the sharp escalation of rhetoric between Washington and Moscow - and one month after the Russian invasion of Ukraine - is now sending worrying signals to the global community. The Cold War climate at the level of statements by leaders and officials of the two countries yesterday was accompanied by the strike launched by Russian forces against a nuclear research centre in Kharkiv, as the Ukrainian parliament made known, spreading global horror at the idea of a return to extremes for the international order.
"At the moment it is impossible to estimate the extent of damage due to the hostilities that do not stop in the area of the nuclear facility," the Ukrainian parliament said in a post, citing the state regulatory nuclear inspection authority, while regaining control over the Chernobyl and Zaporizhzhya plants has been a strategic goal of Moscow from the very beginning of the attack on Ukrainian territory.
The "fire game" of nuclear weapons, which has been sidelined in international security since the end of the Cold War, is, however, returning more and more to the forefront every day, given the operational stalemate in which the Kremlin has found itself after the first month of operations and despite the Russian side's declaration that it is entering the second phase of the war against Ukraine. Whether this also constitutes an upgrade in military means and even with the limited use of nuclear weapons ('small nukes') is the major question in recent hours for world leaders and analysts, especially on the other side of the Atlantic, with US President Joe Biden attempting yesterday in a 'fiery' speech to reverse, in terms of symbolism, the 'Warsaw Pact', while sending warning signals from the city of the same name.
"Butcher" Putin
Escalating his rhetoric abruptly, the US President called Vladimir Putin a "butcher" while assessing that his Russian counterpart cannot remain in power and that his war against Ukraine is a strategic failure for Moscow.
"We will have a different future, a brighter future, rooted in democracy and principles, hope and light, decency and dignity, freedom, possibilities. For God's sake, this man cannot remain in power," Joe Biden told a crowd in Warsaw. He added: "This war is already a strategic failure for Russia."
[BR]
In contrast, the US President argued that the Russian invasion of Ukraine united the West, clarifying both that NATO is a defensive alliance that never sought the fall of Russia and that "the Russian people are not our enemy." "Let me say this, if you can hear me. You, the people of Russia are not our enemy. I refuse to believe that you accept the killing of innocent children and grandparents nor that you accept that hospitals, schools, kindergartens are being pounded by Russian missiles and bombs," the US President eloquently described.
The limit again is Warsaw
Still, from the symbol city of the Cold War, Warsaw, where in 1955 the pact to form a defensive military alliance of Soviet countries (anti-NATO) was signed, the US head of state attempted to reverse the historical symbolism politically, claiming that the US did not wish to enter into conflict with the Russian forces that had invaded Ukraine. At the same time, however, he issued a clear warning to Moscow to "do not consider moving an inch into NATO territory."
Attempting even to underline the ideological significance of the distance between Washington and Moscow, the US President predicted that the battle "between democracy and autocracy" would be a long one and that the US was "on the side" of Ukraine. In this regard, Joe Biden described the time horizon of the conflict as long-term, saying that "this battle will not be won in a few days or months. We must arm ourselves for a long battle ahead," while assuring Ukrainians that "we stand with you."
It was not only the symbolism of the place, however, but also the content of US President Joe Biden's speech yesterday that provoked an angry reaction from the Kremlin, with its spokesman dismissing the claims, stressing that Russia's president is elected by Russians. Asked about this, Dmitry Peskov told Reuters that "it is not up to Biden to decide. The president of Russia is elected by the Russians."
Moreover, the Kremlin was quick to point out that President Biden's comments about his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin narrowed the scope for improving relations between the two countries after the White House occupant called the Russian leader a "butcher" beyond diplomatic protocol.
Against the backdrop of a rapid deterioration in US-Russia relations against the backdrop of Warsaw, US President Joe Biden did not call for regime change in Russia when he said Russian President Vladimir Putin "cannot remain in power", a White House official explained in this regard.
Instead, "what the president meant to say was that Putin cannot be allowed to exercise power over his neighbors or the region. He was not discussing Putin's power in Russia or regime change," the official pointed out, tempering references to that. The clarification from Washington's side rather acted as a fire extinguisher for its public image, as internationally isolated - after waves of sanctions - Moscow wants stronger legitimacy to continue its operations at this stage.
The fact, moreover, that Moscow is attempting to create a narrative with victim roles for the US and NATO regarding their stance in Eastern Europe in order to give political impetus to its operations, has been pointed out many times by Washington, when the Western Allies even appear "worried" about the possibility of Russia's use of "chemical weapons".
Back to "de-escalation"
An extreme verbal position on the part of the US could, moreover, at this point in time be used politically by Moscow to legitimize any application of the "Soviet doctrine" regarding the use of nuclear weapons, a doctrine allegedly developed by the Putin administration. The concern in the face of such a possibility is, moreover, heightened by the repeated warnings issued recently by high-ranking Moscow officials, the latest of whom was Dmitry Medvedev, Vice-Chairman of the country's Security Council, only yesterday. He even listed yesterday the reasons why Moscow could launch a limited nuclear strike, citing in fact the doctrine adopted by the Kremlin from 2000 onwards because of the distance that separated Russia at that time from Western supremacy in conventional weapons.
Moscow's significant lag in military technology, combined with its inherent fear of a Western attack within its borders, resulted in the concept of "de-escalation" being adopted as a defensive move in Moscow's nuclear program, thus justifying a limited nuclear strike should it feel an "existential" threat.
From the same perspective, limited use of nuclear weapons is estimated to de-escalate a deadlocked conflict for Russian national interests, while forcing the adversary to return to the original status quo, which in the case of Eastern Europe, would even bring it to the limits of the 1997 map, i.e. long before NATO's eastward enlargement.
Source: protothema.gr
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs Cyprus Times
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or Cyprus Times
Source
