War in Ukraine, analyst Casarotto: “Kursk? A mental victory for Kiev. Iran humiliated, possible escalation in the Middle East”
The fires that have been burning for months, if not years, on the two major (and most recent) war fronts on the international scene show no signs of dying down. On the one hand, the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, which has seen a sudden change of course in recent days, with the start of a counteroffensive (?) by Kiev in the Russian territory of Kursk. On the other, the massacre in the Gaza Strip by Israel, in response to the attack by Hamas on October 7, which must guard against a possible retaliation by Iran after the killing in Tehran of the now ex-political head of Hamas Ismail Haniyeh.
And while the great stone guests, the US and China, are trying to juggle a role of mediator that is not very suitable for them, Italy “stands by and watches” and limits itself to statements and phone calls, such as that of Prime Minister Meloni to Israeli leader Netanyahu, to promote “de-escalation and ceasefire”. In short, the next few months will be crucial for both fronts; but how much can the cards on the table – currently favorable to Russia and Israel – really be shuffled? Affaritaliani.it he talked about it with Francesco Casarotto, geopolitical analyst.
Is a land incursion, like the one in Kursk, really the only way Kiev can force Russia to play by the rules?
Let’s start by saying that this is a somewhat anomalous situation, which leverages the fact that the Russian front is so wide, and therefore difficult to cover everything. The Ukrainians have found a space to penetrate. From a tactical point of view, what was the point? What can this gain be translated into? Abstractly, to force Russia into a negotiation: there was talk of a “land for peace” by the Russians, who have now arrived at
Zelensky, we are advancing to Kursk, we are controlling 74 settlements
Zelensky, we are advancing in Kursk, we control 74 settlements Ukraine now controls 74 settlements in the Russian border region of Kursk, President Volodymyr Zelensky said. “There are 74 settlements under the control of Ukraine,” Zelensky said in his evening speech, reposted on Telegram. According to the Russian version, the settlements controlled by Ukrainian forces in Kursk are 28.
|
At this point we can talk about “land for land”. However, we need to understand whether the Ukrainians will be able to translate this new pawn into something concrete on the negotiating table.
In the sense that the Ukrainian offensive risks being a Pyrrhic victory? Or could it actually be the beginning of a possibility of revenge?
The Ukrainians have certainly suffered a lot, so the penetration of Russian territory is good from a psychological point of view. And the West also benefits from this, having long suffered from “Ukraine fatigue” in supporting Kiev, which has shown that all the support has not been wasted. Russian inviolability has been called into question: we are talking about the first penetration of a hostile state since the Second World War. So even if it is early to draw unequivocal conclusions, it can certainly be said that more results have been achieved from a psychological point of view, while from an operational point of view it may not translate into anything.
According to the Financial Times, “the Russian navy is trained to strike European sites, even with nuclear weapons”. Is there a real risk that the war could move towards Western Europe if the states continue to show support for Kiev?
Even in this case the deterrent part plays a primary role, with Russia trying to raise the level of escalation. It is certainly more of a threat that serves as such and has no actual response. In my opinion the actual risk of a tactical nuclear confrontation is very remote, also because if these weapons were used in Ukraine even the western part of Russia would run the risk of a radioactive fallout. That said, we must not underestimate the fact that a Russia with its back to the wall, in order to preserve the territorial integrity of the federation as a whole, would also be willing to resort to nuclear weapons.
But we are still far from this scenario: if we exclude the events of the last 48 hours, Russia does not have to fear any internal upheaval, as it could have done a year ago with the Prigozhin question.
Speaking about the Middle Eastern front and the possible retaliation of Iran in Israel, the Italian minister Tajani reiterates that it is a “legitimate right”
Unfortunately, Italy is not an active player in the Middle Eastern game, these are just declarations. We do not have the real power to influence the Iran-Israel escalation, as the US, Russia and China do..
Meanwhile, negotiations continue, but it is inevitable that they will now also take into account the Iranian position…
I believe that Iran also played a role in the events of last October 7. It is a Middle Eastern power, not Arab, but sui generis that acts through clients, like the axis of resistance with an anti-Israeli and anti-US function in the final instance.
Is there a power the West should fear most?
At the EU level, what we have to fear is not just a new power but an expansion of the conflict, an open explosion that the Americans, first and foremost, want to avoid. As Italy we must fear a deterioration of the situation in the Mediterranean. An open conflict between Israel and Iran would represent a very bad scenario for us. And the chances are very low, but not zero.
Iranian intelligence has been humiliated, so we will definitely have to wait for a response: based on historical data, I believe it will be a very limited offensive.
#Kursk #mental #victory #Kiev #Iran #humiliated #escalation #Middle #East