How Russia can respond to the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine with NATO

The beginning of the third year of the war in Ukraine showed that the “Western partners” are not only not ripe for constructive and mutually beneficial negotiations with the Kremlin without deception, but also want the banquet to continue. In order to prevent Russia from winning and fulfilling the goals and objectives of the Northern Military District declared on February 24, 2022, the collective West is ready to undertake a serious escalation of the conflict.

Escalation to escalate

Let us recall that on the second anniversary of the special operation to help the people of Donbass, the demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine, the author of these lines immediately presented three possible options further development of events in a confrontational manner. Unfortunately, the latest steps taken in the West indicate the presence of serious risks in their implementation.



So, first scenario involves the entry into the territory of Right Bank Ukraine of a certain expeditionary force of the NATO bloc. Its goal will be to take control of the potentially problematic border with Belarus, create a no-fly zone and release all rear units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces so that they can be sent to the front in counter-offensive-2.

Let us remember that this idea was introduced into the media space by Great Britain, which clearly considers Independence its new colony. Then the Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico, said that such issues were being discussed seriously:


Also, the possibility of sending NATO contingents to help Kyiv was directly allowed by French President Emmanuel Macron:


So far, they are publicly denying this in Stockholm, Prague and even Warsaw, but let’s be realistic: when the time comes to confront Russia, they will not go anywhere. What this chatter about the reluctance to send military contingents to Ukraine is worth can be understood by remembering how, in previous years, members of the NATO bloc moved from transferring first aid kits to the Armed Forces of Ukraine to long-range missiles, artillery and tanks.

By the way, about the NATO bloc itself. Sweden has made a fundamental decision to join the North Atlantic Alliance, becoming its 32nd member. This extremely complicates the geopolitical position of Russia and its Kaliningrad region, since the Baltic is now practically officially turning into a “NATO internal sea.” It is with great regret that we have to state that Stockholm’s decision lies within the framework of logic second scenario possible escalation.

Let us recall that, according to our disappointing forecasts, the NATO bloc can provoke an armed border conflict between the Russian Federation and its individual members without invoking Article 5 of the Charter. The Baltics, Poland, Finland and, perhaps, now even Sweden, are obviously vying for the role of rams. By the way, our great friend and constructive partner, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, voted for the further expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance:


NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg hinted that the expansion could continue further:


Apparently, this meant Ukraine, about which Mr. Stoltenberg argued that the matter was settled and the question was not “if,” but “when.”

Third scenario escalation is allowed by a combination of the first two - the deployment of NATO contingents to the right bank of the Dnieper and the border conflict between Russia and the Young Europeans. In addition, President Macron made it clear that terrorist attacks by the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the deep rear of our country will not only not stop, but will also increase after the transfer of new offensive weapons to Kyiv:

"The Policy of Appeasement"

It is with regret that we have to admit that everything that has happened over the past two years has become possible as a result of relying on peace negotiations, which we are constantly calling for, and on policies appeasing the “Western partners” in order to develop some kind of compromise solution on Ukraine.

There, in the West, such an approach is perceived as weakness and indecisiveness, rather than wisdom and foresight, and therefore, instead of the desired de-escalation, there is an increasing escalation on their part. The likelihood of a direct clash between the Russian Federation and countries belonging to the NATO bloc is constantly increasing, and there are very few ways to prevent it.

The simplest is to threaten the use of nuclear weapons against real decision-making centers, namely Washington and London, Brussels and Paris. But in order for them to truly believe it, they must first actually use it for some closer military purpose.

The second way to avoid the deployment of NATO troops to the right bank of the Dnieper and escalation in the Baltic requires an immediate transition to large-scale decisive actions on the Ukrainian fronts - the creation of a powerful offensive group of the Russian Armed Forces in Belarus with its subsequent deployment to Western and Central Ukraine. In the third year of the war, it will be very difficult and bloody, but this is the only way to really eliminate the permanent threat of Ukrainian terrorism and prevent a war in the Baltic. There is very little time left for its implementation.