On Tuesday, Ukraine launched its second drone strike on Moscow to date and the first targeting civilian homes. Eight fixed-wing drones were launched, of which at least one crashed into an apartment building.
Tuesday’s attack on the capital city of Russia is a signal that, following last week’s G7 meeting – at which the US announced it would send F-16 fighters—the imperialist powers have decided to bring the war ever more directly into Russian territory.
These attacks are aimed at provoking a retaliatory response by Russia, which could then be used to justify a further escalation by NATO, including the potential entry of NATO troops directly into the conflict.
Ukraine has received US authorization in private to carry out strikes inside Russia, the Times of London reported in December. “The Pentagon has given a tacit endorsement of Ukraine’s long-range attacks on targets inside Russia,” it wrote.
Statements from political figures in the US and its allies implicitly endorsed the attacks.
Former congressman Adam Kinzinger, an anti-Trump Republican, wrote: “Hey #Russia. You lost your right to be outraged about a drone attack on Moscow back in Feb 2022. Live by the sword…”
UK Foreign Minister James Cleverly said that Ukraine has “the right to project force beyond its borders” and that such attacks are “internationally recognized as being legitimate as part of a nation’s self-defense.”
Last week, a far-right reporter asked Democratic Representative Jerrold Nadler whether he opposed attacks inside Russia, to which he replied, “Nope… that’s fair play. … But why should Russia feel that they can invade somebody else? And have total safety at home?”
Beyond the immediate impact of the drone strikes, Tuesday’s attack could also be preparatory to a more sustained air assault.
The WSWS wrote, “If the decision to send F-16s to Ukraine was taken months ago, it was taken at a time when the US-NATO proxy forces in Ukraine were performing far better than they are now.” With the fall of Bakhmut, we added, “a much vaunted Ukrainian counter-offensive has failed to materialize.”
This raised the question, “How will the United States respond to this latest debacle? How much further can Washington escalate?”
The drone attacks give an indication. They are part of a series of measures taken by the US-NATO powers and its proxy force in Ukraine since the G7 meeting 10 days ago.
Last Wednesday, the USS Gerald R. Ford, the largest warship ever constructed, arrived in Oslo, Norway before carrying out “freedom of navigation” operations in the Arctic waters near Russia. Yesterday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in Sweden to push for its accession to NATO as the western borders of Russia become a battlefront.
It is becoming clear that the sweeping goals articulated by the United States for its Ukrainian proxy force to “go on the offensive to liberate Russian-occupied Ukraine,” as US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley spelled out in January, are not possible without a massive expansion of US-NATO involvement in the war.
NATO’s preparations for a direct entry into the war are being increasingly openly discussed. On Tuesday, General Karel Řehka, the chief of the general staff of the Czech armed forces, said that NATO needs to “prepare” for a direct war with Russia.
“War between Russia and the North Atlantic Alliance… is possible,” he said. Russia “is currently on a course towards a conflict with the Alliance. … It can happen, and it is necessary to prepare for it in the long run.”
The US media is advocating the concept that the threat of nuclear war is an acceptable risk in seeking the “defeat” of Russia, publicly claiming that Putin’s failure to retaliate in response to perpetual NATO provocations gives the United States the freedom to escalate further.
No comments:
Post a Comment