The United States could find it difficult to not involve itself directly in the Ukraine war if Russian missiles and air power lead to large-scale destruction and deaths in Ukraine.
Analysts say Russia could easily cripple Ukraine without resorting to the use of nuclear weapons and wonder if in such a situation the US would continue with its current policy of supporting Kyiv from outside by supplying it with weapons, money and other resources.
“What would the American response be if and when Russia launches a massive aerial bombing campaign against major urban centres (in Ukraine) that could result in growing numbers of civilian casualties with the images of rising death and destruction broadcast daily on television and the internet?” asks Leon Hadar in the National Interest magazine.
The magazine is published by National Interest, a much-respected Washington-based think-tank dealing with developments in foreign and military affairs.
In recent weeks there has been a growing concern in the US and Europe about Moscow’s threat to use nukes and an intensification of the Ukraine conflict.
The Russian defence minister Sergey Shoigu had called his Indian and Chinese counterparts earlier in the week to inform them about the possibility of Ukraine using a ‘dirty bomb’ — an explosive that can create radioactive radiation within a limited area to create panic among the population — and blame it on Russia.
However, the western leaders saw the Russian allegation as a pretext on Moscow’s part to prepare the ground for the use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
Russia has maintained that it does not believe in a “first-strike” military doctrine and it would use nuclear weapons only if strategic assets are targeted inside the Russian territory.
But Hadar wrote in his analysis that when there is a lot of talk about Vladimir Putin’s threat to use nuclear weapons, “we need to be reminded that a global superpower can cripple a small or mid-sized power without resorting to the use of nukes”.
He pointed out that by just using the full force of its conventional weapons, Russia could overwhelm Ukraine.
War intensifies
On October 29, Moscow decided to suspend its participation in the Black Sea deal in response to a major Ukrainian drone attack on its fleet near the port of Sevastopol in Crimea. This would effectively cut off shipments from Ukraine, one of the world’s top grain exporters, and adversely affect the food situation globally.
This weekend the US announced another $275 million military assistance for Ukraine that would include arms, munitions, and equipment, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said. The US would also provide Ukraine with NASAMS air defence system to deal with the Russian missiles, he said.
Earlier this month, both Russia and NATO conducted their nuclear drills to test the preparedness of their strategic forces.
However, Russia on October 29 warned the US that the accelerated deployment of modernised B 61 tactical nuclear weapons at NATO bases in Europe would lower the “nuclear threshold” and Russia would take the move into account in its military planning.
The US has already cautioned Russia that if it attacked a NATO member it could activate Article 5 of the NATO treaty and force all the members of the alliance to come together to fight Moscow. The West has also warned Russia that if it used tactical nuclear weapons in the Ukraine war, the consequences would be dire.
Conventional weapons are equally deadly
Experts argue that a powerful country need not resort to nuclear weapons to overwhelm a smaller country. The death and destruction from air bombings during World War II and in subsequent wars were as high and horrific as those in Hiroshima and Nagasaki when nuclear bombs were dropped on the Japanese cities by America in 1945.
Experts wonder why Putin would use nuclear weapons before deploying his air power and other conventional weapons to force Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to agree to a deal.
Russia has a strong fleet of combat aircraft and has used them extensively in wars in Chechnya, Georgia, and Syria but so far it has not used them in Ukraine.
Analysts pointed out that if Russia were to use its air force, the costs for the Ukraine military and the civilian population would be overwhelming.
In such a situation the US would be under pressure to join in a direct confrontation with Russia.
The choices before the US
But even if the US stays away from the conflict and limits its participation by providing Ukraine with sophisticated defensive and offensive weapons, it could not guarantee the Ukrainian army from targeting strategic assets in Russia.
The Ukrainian forces had targeted the bridge connecting Crimea with Russia inside the Russian territory recently. As Russia intensifies its air campaign in Ukraine, there could be more retaliatory action by the Ukrainian army targeting critical assets inside Russia.
If that happened it could prompt Moscow to use its tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Russia has warned that it could use nukes if its strategic assets came under attack.
When such a situation arises it would force the US to intervene to prevent the conflict from spreading beyond Ukraine.
To avoid further worsening of the situation, there is a growing view among countries beyond Europe that America should convince Ukraine to return to the negotiating table with Russia to end the conflict.
The leaders of the most important economies in the world are scheduled to meet at the G20 summit in Indonesia next month.
There is rising optimism among many countries that a solution could finally emerge from the summit to bring the nine-month-old Ukraine war to an early end.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
