The possibility of limited military intervention increases when Putin assassins his brother’s civilians – at worst, it ignites World War II, at best it prevents the destruction of civilians, writes HS journalist Vesa Sirén in his Ball Movements column.
Russian president Vladimir Putin in the midst of its attack on Ukraine on Sunday, February 27, also ordered the high-alert state of its nuclear forces.
I was on a business trip to Ukraine, and of course the abdominal cramps would grow, although the difference with the norm readiness remained unclear.
It mainly sounded like a warning: do not try to prevent my military attack on Ukraine, no matter how I bombard maternity and child hospitals.
I have nuclear weapons!
The warning has worked. President of the Brave Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi has asked the outside powers to close the airspace of his country. Countries down to the United States have refused because it would increase the risk of World War II.
Finland The Winter War – to which Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has been compared in the world – ended in truce, partly because Britain and France began to work on Finland’s military assistance. It formed a partial deterrent to Stalin’s offensive.
Could a plan for a more limited international military operation curb Putin, like Stalin once did? The issue is also relevant to Finland.
We are the only non-NATO country on Russia’s western border that is not under Putin’s control, as Belarus is – and Ukraine may soon be in part if Putin’s aggression is not stopped.
“Winter War Comparisons are useless because no one takes the risk of a nuclear war because of Ukraine “, Program Director of the Institute of Foreign Policy Arkady Moshes estimates.
Instead, economic sanctions can still be tightened. And air force fighters to offer Ukraine where missiles and other weapons have already been offered.
What about if civilians continue to end up in mass graves? It also puts pressure on voters in the US and the EU to carry out military operations to rescue civilians as well.
The strongest act would be to gather an alliance like in the first Gulf War. The goal would be to remove the attacker (then Iraq, now Russia) from the attacking country (then Kuwait, now Ukraine) without invading the attacker’s territory.
“It would be an excellent solution, but Iraq did not have nuclear weapons. In that situation, Russia would surely use a nuclear weapon, ”said the former intelligence chief of the Defense Forces and Major General evp Pekka Toveri.
Western Ukraine is now being bombed as well. Is it possible to close the airspace between the Lviv and Polish borders through NATO country Poland and thus provide military-humanitarian support for the evacuation route used by millions of people in the region? Or the closure of NATO airspace through the air in the south-western corner of Ukraine to Odessa to secure civilian evacuation routes?
“The killing of women and children industrially makes us angry. Personally, I think that would be quite right if we really want to help Ukraine, ”says Toveri.
However, he does not believe that NATO is ready for this.
“The strength of NATO is that if you are a member, there is nothing to worry about. But if you are not, you can. ”
Therefore, for the time being, attempts are being made to increase sanctions and arms aid. Although it has not rescued civilians who ended up in mass graves.
“If the war continues for a long time, anti-artillery research and long-range artillery systems that require longer training, for example, can also be brought. And, of course, fighters, if there are any remaining air bases from which Ukrainians can get into the air, ”Toveri estimates.
#Columns #nuclearweapon #state #weaker
