With the increasing tension on the battlefield in Ukraine, it seems that it is no longer sustainable, and this stalemate, which is regarded by the international community as a "human war", is facing a breakthrough turn.
At this moment, the NATO camp can no longer hold back, showing a posture of eagerness to try, intending to directly intervene in it.
The Observer Network made a striking news on March 2**: Singapore's Defense Minister Ng Eng Hen revealed in his explanation of Singapore's plan to purchase F-35A fighter jets in Parliament that the US F-35A** fighter jets have quietly set foot on the battlefield in Ukraine, taking on the task of detecting and identifying the ground air defense missile bases deployed by the Russian army in Ukrainian territory, and sharing such key intelligence with NATO allies in real time.
Huang Yonghong emphasized that the participation of the F-35A in the Russia-Ukraine conflict is a recent fact. According to reports, France** disclosed that France** is considering sending its own special forces deep into the hinterland of Ukraine to guide the Ukrainian army in operations on the spot, so as to form a "strategic containment" against Russia.
Prior to this, although the French special forces were mainly responsible for training Ukrainian soldiers in Poland and assisting in the delivery of military aid to Kyiv, this is the first time that they have publicly stated that they are "considering" sending their elite forces to Ukraine for deployment and directly "participating in actual combat guidance".
The superposition of these two pieces of news is undoubtedly like adding fuel to the fire, exacerbating the outside world's high anxiety about NATO's deep involvement in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Not so long ago, Russia sent a deafening signal of nuclear deterrence in response to a possible direct intervention by NATO.
According to the relay of Minnan Network on March 1, Russia's ** Putin solemnly pointed out on February 29 that the reckless actions of the West in diplomacy and military action are gradually accumulating as a factor triggering the risk of nuclear war, or will lead to the destruction of the civilized world.
Before Putin's statement, Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation and former ** Medvedev issued a strong warning as early as mid-February that if the Russian army has to abandon the occupied area, Russia will start a full-scale nuclear war with the West, at that time, Russia's nuclear missiles will not only aim at Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine, but even lock on Washington, Berlin and London and other core NATO cities, in order to show that it will never back down.
As early as earlier, according to the Financial Associated Press on February 8, Medvedev had solemnly stated that once the tension between Russia and NATO evolves to the point of armed conflict, Moscow will face an inevitable choice, that is, to take nuclear ** as a countermeasure, which may trigger the world's well-known "doomsday" level consequences, which will lead to the end of everything.
While the Russian military is advancing step by step to achieve a significant advantage, its top leadership continues to release a strong signal of nuclear deterrence, and the root cause of this is that the signs of increasing direct involvement of NATO forces are clear, indicating that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine may enter a more intense 2At stage 0, this ** war is on the verge of a "major escalation", when the world's largest military alliance may "officially enter the war" in some form.
At present, about 420,000 Russian troops are stationed in Ukraine, and at the same time, the Russian economy is showing adversity, and it is expected that this year's GDP growth rate is expected to exceed that of the United States and the European Union, revealing a "stronger and stronger war, war leads to prosperity".
Moreover, Russia's war machine is running at full speed and working together efficiently, and in theory, Russia's top decision-makers, including Putin, should show firm confidence.
However, they show deep concern and frequently use "common destruction" as a warning to their enemies. The reason behind this is clear: NATO is too powerful for Russia alone. Therefore, under the trade-off, Russia hopes to deter the NATO camp with a strong warning of "jade burning".
NATO's strength is not unfounded or exaggerated, as Medvedev put it, it is an organization with a huge military force, with a population base of nearly 1 billion and a whopping 1.00 billionThe $5 trillion joint military budget dwarfs Russia's existing military potential and makes the contest between the two sides asymmetrical.
A similar view was echoed by Alexei Leonkov, editor of Russia's National Arsenal magazine, who pointed out that NATO has a total of 3.2 million troops. In the face of such a serious NATO threat, Russia believes that the best response strategy is to put its nuclear arsenal on high alert and truly achieve "ready for actual combat deployment".
In Leonkov's view, in the face of pressure from NATO, the only card in Russia's hands that can form an effective balanced deterrence is precisely its nuclear strength.
Based on the analysis of objective facts, it is difficult to achieve a chance of victory if Russia only relies on conventional military force to engage in a contest with NATO like the Russia-Ukraine conflict on the premise of not using nuclear **.
The reality, however, shows that even as Russia frequently demonstrates its resolve at all costs, its warnings of nuclear war have not been taken seriously enough by NATO. Recently, U.S. F-35 fighter jets have actually been involved in related conflicts, while French special forces are preparing to enter the battlefield in Ukraine.
Why is this happening, and are NATO countries really ignoring the risk of triggering a global war or even an apocalyptic catastrophe? The reasons for this can be summarized as follows:
The current Russia-Ukraine conflict contains a deep-seated game related to the international landscape, which is essentially a decisive battle between the development model of a "unipolar world" and a "multipolar world", and the defeat of either side will bring unbearable consequences.
If the United States and Europe lose, the trend of multipolarization will surely grow rapidly; On the contrary, if the multipolar camp represented by China and Russia is frustrated, it will suffer a heavy blow.
NATO countries have chosen to participate directly in the conflict in Ukraine, not with the intention of defeating Russia head-on, but with the aim of preventing Ukraine's complete defeat. They are well aware that once Russian forces are forced to retreat beyond their pre-1991 borders, Putin may be forced to resort to nuclear ...
NATO members generally hold the strategic judgment that Putin is unlikely to risk a nuclear war as long as he does not take the lead in nuclear action.
Putin himself has emphasized the principle that "there is no winner in a nuclear war", and the United States, as another nuclear superpower, is also clearly aware of this. Therefore, in this dangerous strategic interaction, all parties are carefully weighing the bottom line of action against the possible ripple effect.
List of high-quality authors