Russia has a larger stockpile of nuclear weapons compared to NATO countries, according to recent statements made by President Putin. The President issued a strong warning, asserting that Russia’s nuclear capabilities surpass those of NATO combined.
The conflict in Ukraine has escalated due to Western countries providing heavy weaponry and equipment to Ukraine without distinction. This includes tanks such as Leopard 2, M1A1, and M1A2 main battle tanks, Challenger-2 main battle tanks, PT-91 tanks, and M2A2 Bradley combat vehicles, along with AMX-10RC armored reconnaissance vehicles and Stryker infantry carriers. Germany has also supplied the Weasel infantry carrier. These actions demonstrate that Western countries have deployed their most advanced ground combat equipment in the Ukrainian conflict.
The influx of Western heavy weapons and equipment has had an impact on Russia’s ground operations. While the Russian military has managed to inflict some damage on Western equipment during combat, the continued support poses a significant challenge to determining when the operations of both sides will cease.
In response, President Putin sternly warned that the ongoing assistance of Western fighter jets, main battle tanks, and infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine could potentially trigger a nuclear war.
Russia views its numerical and capability advantages in nuclear weaponry as a natural advantage in matters of national security. If its security is significantly threatened and conventional conflicts with NATO cannot be won, Russia asserts its willingness to use nuclear weapons to safeguard its sovereignty and strategic security.
Russia has expressed its dissatisfaction with the arrogant military aid provided by Western countries. The upcoming NATO summit will address the continuation of various military assistance to Ukraine. Under pressure from the United States, several nations have sent high-end fighter planes, heavy equipment, long-range missiles, and destructive weapons to Ukraine for ongoing military support.
The escalation on the battlefield has further heightened tensions. If a major conflict were to erupt, with continuous offensives and counteroffensives on different fronts, the question of when the conflict would end becomes a pressing concern. The protracted conflict would have significant consequences for both sides, resulting in damage to the Russian economy, Ukrainian infrastructure, and other vital elements.
By prolonging and intensifying the conflict, the United States aims to exhaust Russia and both sides through proxy wars and hybrid warfare. Ukraine, serving as a strategic pawn in Europe, has suffered substantial losses and casualties. The United States seeks to exploit Ukraine’s casualties to deplete Russia’s military power, forcing Russia to increase military spending and make further military investments despite the impact on its domestic economy.
President Putin has expressed the need to increase defense investment, indicating an increase in military expenditure and the possibility of establishing new military regions and group armies. The Russian armed forces personnel strength will rapidly grow, but this will significantly affect the domestic economy.
Russia’s warning is intended to emphasize its “red line,” showcasing its absolute capabilities and cautioning the United States and NATO against arrogance. If Russia’s strategy in Europe becomes unbearable, with the belief that national security will suffer unprecedented damage, the use of nuclear weapons may become an option.
Additionally, the public acknowledgment of Belarus’ “nuclear sharing” has raised concerns. The leaders of both Russia and Belarus have confirmed the presence of nuclear bombs in Belarus, which can be deployed if necessary. The President of Belarus has repeatedly emphasized their willingness to use tactical nuclear bombs to defend their territory against deterrence from Western countries. In the face of continuous Western aid to Ukraine, the warnings issued by Russia and Belarus raise important questions about Western countries’ understanding of the situation.
If the conventional conflict inflicts significant harm on both sides and crosses Russia’s “red line,” the conflict may expand to engulf the entirety of Europe. Any country involved in aiding Ukraine would become a target for nuclear strikes.
Therefore, these countries must carefully consider the benefits they gain from aiding Ukraine. If their involvement serves the interests of the United States while leaving them vulnerable to disaster, Europe could become the worst affected region in the spillover of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, potentially even turning into a nuclear disaster zone.
