A direct confrontation between the North Atlantic Alliance and Russia would have catastrophic consequences. Yet most politicians treat this threat rather lightly. At least, that is how it seems.
Ideas such as shooting down Russian drones and combat aircraft that enter NATO airspace are grave escalation steps with a large potential to trigger a domino effect.
Such a scenario, however, would suit Ukraine.
John Mearsheimer recently stated that the only way for Kyiv to reverse the unfavorable course of this war is to pull the North Atlantic Alliance into it. We quote: “If the Ukrainians still have any hope of saving the situation, it is the involvement of NATO in the fight.”
The world-renowned political scientist compared this to Israeli efforts to draw the United States into what would otherwise be a local war in the Middle East. “They understand that they cannot defeat Iran alone.” In part, they succeeded (the bombing of facilities where uranium was being enriched).
The Ukrainians are calling for this scenario, as shown by a series of escalation steps and demands placed on (non-treaty-bound) Western allies that, if fulfilled, could bring them into direct confrontation with Russia. With thousands of nuclear warheads, Russia plays in a much higher league than Iran.
Shoot the Russians over Ukraine. Or at least over your own territory
These efforts to get NATO members to do something that brings them closer to a confrontation with the Kremlin also manifested during the escalating events of recent weeks.
Why Russian drones were in Poland remains unclear. Several scenarios are possible — from a provocation to a signal interference consequence, even to the drones being controlled or launched by the Ukrainians. It is equally unclear why Moscow is conducting dangerous maneuvers with combat aircraft.
Let us set those questions aside for now. As well as the controversy over whether Russia actually wants to expand the conflict. Instead, let us focus on the Ukrainian reaction to these events.
Kyiv, for example, has asked the North Atlantic Alliance that its members shoot down drones over their airspace that clearly enter Polish airspace. But this would practically mean NATO entering an armed conflict with Russia — and doing so on its own initiative.
Anyone with a good memory will recall that, shortly after the war began, the Ukrainians demanded an even more radical step. Zelenskyy then appealed to Western heads of state and government to close Ukrainian airspace and protect it from the Russian air force.
The United States rejected this at the time. The salami tactic, however, might be more successful.
The reaction to Russian combat aircraft in Estonian airspace was similar. Zelenskyy would have them shot down immediately rather than have the Alliance do it. After all, U.S. President Donald Trump also clearly supported this idea.
Certainly, a country whose airspace is violated has the right to do so. But that does not automatically make it a wise step. Zelenskyy himself claims that NATO countries are rightly afraid of acting against Russia: “They are afraid, and I think they are right, because Russia is crazy.”
Nevertheless, he wants them to involve themselves in a war that could end in a nuclear catastrophe.
Taiwan has also for years been subject to provocations and shows of force by Beijing. Despite U.S. support, Taiwan does not dare to shoot down a Chinese fighter or sink a destroyer. It knows what is at stake. A conflict between nuclear powers could loom. That is why Taipei ignores these incidents, even though it is prepared to intervene in case of danger.
Several strategy experts in a Carnegie Endowment for International Peace survey agreed that shooting down piloted combat aircraft, unless it is an aggressive act, is a dangerous step that “could provoke conflicts that should be avoided.”
Except Moscow!
The second issue that has surfaced in recent days is Ukraine’s demand for delivery of American Tomahawk long-range missiles — and the possibility of using them on Russian territory.
Here Donald Trump and his policy of carrot-and-stick toward Russia come into play. He is currently on a somewhat more aggressive tack, after declaring at the end of September that Russia is a “paper tiger” and that Ukraine could retake all its territories. As late as August he had complained to Biden that Kyiv had not been allowed earlier to use American weapons against targets in Russia.
Clearly, the Ukrainian leadership is trying to exploit this. So far it seems to be working.
Trump has already told Zelenskyy that he would be open to lifting the ban on using American long-range weapons against targets in Russia, although he has not committed to it. Later, however, the U.S. special envoy for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, stated that the president had already given Kyiv the green light.
U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance even announced on Sunday, 28 September, that the American government was reviewing Kyiv’s request for Tomahawk missiles, with the final decision resting with Trump.
Although Tomahawk cruise missiles do not have the potential to become a decisive weapon (mainly due to their limited numbers and low production capacity), with a range of about 1,500 kilometers (some types even more) they could threaten several major Russian cities, including Moscow.
With such a tool in hand, Kyiv could further escalate tensions and take measures for which the Kremlin would also hold the West responsible. Peace would thus recede further into the distance, while the prospect of a conflict between two blocs of power draws markedly nearer.
Author: Samuel Kolesár