Next Monday, May 9th, is Victory Day in Russia - cause for a great amount of speculation (and fear) as to what Putin wants to prove by that deadline and what drastic measures he might take to cover losses in Ukraine. While this day in 1945 is celebrated as the day the Soviet Union defeated Nazi Germany, there is no cause for celebration in Moscow over Russia’s military advance in Ukraine, which is still referred to simply as a “special military operation”. But Putin needs some sort of victory here to parade before the public, and speculation tends to lean towards fear that he will use this opportunity to officially declare war on Ukraine. Others speculate that it will simply end up being a celebration packed with neo-Nazi propaganda, which in turn will be used to rally more recruits.
Declaring war on Ukraine, however, would confuse what is already a confusing war footing with unclear objectives: Is Putin attempting to annex Ukraine’s east and a land bridge that connects it to Crimea? Or, as some of his military generals seem to be pushing, is this really a war against NATO at large? Because of the disconnect emerging between Putin and various military/intelligence services with regard to ultimate objectives, we are inclined to lean towards a scenario in which Victory Day (and its runup) are largely characterized by a wildly intensified level of rhetoric, much of which is focused on selling the nuclear option idea…
Russia-Ukraine War Briefing
Next Monday, May 9th, is Victory Day in Russia - cause for a great amount of speculation (and fear) as to what Putin wants to prove by that deadline and what drastic measures he might take to cover losses in Ukraine. While this day in 1945 is celebrated as the day the Soviet Union defeated Nazi Germany, there is no cause for celebration in Moscow over Russia’s military advance in Ukraine, which is still referred to simply as a “special military operation”. But Putin needs some sort of victory here to parade before the public, and speculation tends to lean towards fear that he will use this opportunity to officially declare war on Ukraine. Others speculate that it will simply end up being a celebration packed with neo-Nazi propaganda, which in turn will be used to rally more recruits.
Declaring war on Ukraine, however, would confuse what is already a confusing war footing with unclear objectives: Is Putin attempting to annex Ukraine’s east and a land bridge that connects it to Crimea? Or, as some of his military generals seem to be pushing, is this really a war against NATO at large? Because of the disconnect emerging between Putin and various military/intelligence services with regard to ultimate objectives, we are inclined to lean towards a scenario in which Victory Day (and its runup) are largely characterized by a wildly intensified level of rhetoric, much of which is focused on selling the nuclear option idea to the Russian public.
That rhetoric is likely to focus on NATO countries and nuclear threats. In fact, to a large extent, this is already unfolding this week, as Finland and Sweden gear up to jointly announce their intentions to join NATO–bids that could be approved in as quickly as two weeks by the military alliance.
Earlier this week, a brazen video mockup of a Russian nuclear attack aired on Russian state television, demonstrating a nuclear attack on Ireland and Britain. The attack mock-up, the brainchild of Putin propagandist Dmitry Kiselyov, specifically animates the explosion of a thermonuclear torpedo near the British coastline, causing a 500-meter-high tsunami wave carrying extreme radiation doses.
On Wednesday, the Russian military carried out simulated nuclear missile strikes in Kaliningrad (its western enclave that borders the EU). The simulation was of electronic launches of nuclear-capable Iskander mobile ballistic missile systems near the border with Poland and Lithuania.
Also on Wednesday, a Russian Mi-17 military helicopter entered Finnish airspace. This is the second time in less than a month such an event has occurred as Finland (and Sweden) prepares to join NATO. Last Friday, a Russian spy plane violated Swedish airspace, and prior to that, in March, four Russian fighter jets flew over Sweden’s Gotland Island.
Whether the nuclear option is bluster or a real threat is unknowable. Events of escalation - and a $33-billion American fund for Ukrainian defense is definitely one of them - will push us ever closer to the nuclear option.
The significance of Washington’s $33 billion in aid for Ukrainian defense is rarely mentioned in any real context, but what it means is that the U.S. has decided to embark on a path of destroying Russia’s military - at least to the extent that it would no longer be able to threaten something like the invasion of Ukraine that it launched in late February. Whether NATO as a whole will ultimately play along with this is still unclear - much as the European Union’s proposal to ban Russian oil and unleash a string of very severe sanctions aimed at preventing Russia from seeking alternative markets remains uncertain. The EU and NATO are far from unified formations. However, the EU is set to meet Friday on the embargo plan and is expected to offer resistant countries a two-year extension. Still, the significance of Washington’s $33 billion should be compared to the Kremlin’s ~$66 billion defense budget. When viewed from that perspective, Ukraine is being empowered (weaponized) to continue the fight to preserve its territorial integrity. That is a major escalation point.
To access this exclusive content...
Select your membership level below
COMMUNITY MEMBERSHIP
(FREE)
Full access to the largest energy community on the web
