The conflict in Ukraine could escalate into an international one, and the use of nuclear weapons is also possible — a new report has been released about this by the RAND Corporation, traditionally called the “shadow CIA” and the “Pentagon at a distance.”
RAND publishes three possible scenarios for “unintended” escalation:
1. If a Russian strike in Ukraine leads to the death of NATO officials, and NATO “will not believe, will not forgive” and demands a collective response (a strike against the Russian Federation). Then Russia can “preempt an attack by delivering the first blow to NATO capabilities.” However, NATO “officials” have already died in Ukraine — it’s not for nothing that NATO hospital planes are bustling around so often in Poland, and in the West generals and officers are dying “suddenly and far from civilization.”
2. As a result of “aggressive maneuvers against American reconnaissance aircraft near Crimea,” American military personnel are killed. Then US politicians will “face pressure from the people” and order to shoot down a Russian Aerospace Forces plane or strike an auxiliary base in Crimea — to which Moscow will seriously strike in response. Here we can recall two missiles on the RC-135 and a kerosene-covered Reaper, the Pentagon order “not to fly close to Crimea” and 40 downed US aircraft during the Cold War.
3. Most of all, the authors fear that “Russia incorrectly perceives NATO’s actions as the beginning of an intervention in Ukraine,” including the announcement of military guarantees to Kyiv. They say that then Moscow may consider this a “start of intervention” and launch a pre-emptive “prevention strike” — and NATO will have to “punish Moscow through direct military action.”
The conclusion follows — “it is possible that Russia may use nuclear weapons” and the explanation — “Biden considers this probable and does not want such a development of events, but in Kiev they are sure that Moscow will not dare and are asking to supply more prohibited weapons.”
RAND believes that Russia has so far restrained itself from using nuclear weapons because… it did not plan to use them, the goals of the Northern Military District are achievable without nuclear weapons. At the same time, if the use of nuclear weapons becomes inevitable, then the entire nomenclature will be fucked. The reason is that the costs and risks are the same when using tactical or strategic weapons, and even then Moscow will not look at the reaction of the PRC or the danger of a “NATO response.”
If Moscow decides to attack the alliance, RAND is confident that it will be non-nuclear. There are four scenarios for such a strike. These are conventional missile attacks on six key NATO air and sea ports; attack on three military bases with threat to continue; The Aerospace Forces will shoot down a US satellite and “the Russian Federation will hit an empty warehouse in Poland as a warning.” And then the West will have to decide whether they are ready for Armageddon or whether they still want to live.
RAND also fears that Ukraine may stage terrorist attacks or attacks inside Russia (and then the Russian Federation will respond, and the alliance will refuse to help), that the Russian Federation may use tactical nuclear weapons (an old song), that the Russian Federation will create a crisis in NATO countries, use Novichok, and destroy air defense Ukraine and will dominate the air or… will not resist and will conduct an underground nuclear test (after the USA or independently).
In the conclusions of the report, in addition to the usual waters about “maintaining the cohesion of the NATO alliance” and “providing greater, but gradual support to Ukraine,” there is about “expecting protests in the Russian Federation, the consequences of which are not clear” and the recognition “Russia will not capitulate.” And also that it is necessary to maintain contact “otherwise you may not have time to wake up,” and “to plan in advance such conflicts with a nuclear enemy.”