Are We Creeping Towards Armageddon?

It’s probably coming first from Russian threats and capacity against NATO support for Ukraine… perhaps later if we honor our commitments to protect Taiwan from China’s invasion threats. It could also rise as a severely weakened Iran runs out of options in its rising conflicts with US-supported Israel. That old notion of “mutually assured destruction” might actually fail as a nuclear deterrent in a world of military challenges, resulting economic depletion and embarrassed autocrats.

Let’s start with the underlying economic reality of Russia and Iran. Unlike the industrialized Western powers and China, those two nations are not manufacturing centers – outside of military weaponry – but resource extraction/agricultural nations. More like very modern, militarily advanced, banana republics. While Iran approaches its conflicts under an immutable religious mantle, Russia is governed by a failing madman’s ego.

Sensing an opportunity to rise in global stature, North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il has increased his ties to Russia, hoping to elevate his existing nuclear capacity with upgrades (particularly in submarine technology) from Russian expertise. His contribution of thousands of North Korean soldiers to fight with Russian soldiers over Ukraine is the escalation that pushed the Biden administration (followed rapidly by France) to allow longer range US-supplied ATACMS tactical ballistic missiles (pictured above) to target Russian troops, military installations and weapon systems inside Russia.

Unlike intercontinental ballistic missiles however, the range of these weapons is not much farther than a few hundred miles into Russia. Also, Ukraine needs to feed targeting coordinates, generated through US satellites, to those missiles to lock in those targets, effectively giving the US verified approval that those targets are appropriate to the mission. I might add that Russian and Chinese hypersonic missiles (so fast so as to make interception exceptionally difficult) are technologically ahead of US equivalents.

As a side show that could rapidly ignite as the major power face off, Iran has further increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels, according to a report from the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, as reported by The Associated Press (AP), November 19th.

But looking at the here and now: As Ukraine launched its first wave of ATACMS missiles, the “Russian Defense Ministry said on Tuesday [11/19] that it defeated a Ukrainian ATACMS attack in the western Bryansk region, shortly before the Kremlin updated its nuclear weapons doctrine to allow for nuclear strikes in response to foreign ballistic missile attacks… Ukrainian forces fired six ‘ballistic missiles,’ the ministry wrote on its official Telegram page, five of which were downed and the sixth damaged. ‘According to confirmed data, American-made ATACMS operational-tactical missiles were used,’ it wrote…. ATACMS fragments fell on the technical territory of a military facility in the Bryansk region, a fire broke out, it was extinguished,’ the ministry added…

“The ministry alleged the attack shortly after Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told journalists that the changes to Russia's nuclear doctrine -- signed by President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday [11/19] -- meant ‘the use of Western non-nuclear rockets by the Armed Forces of Ukraine against Russia can prompt a nuclear response.’” GMS, November 19th. Specifically, Putin expanded the Russian nuclear weapons use doctrine to embrace an attack on Russia and her allies by Western powers – suggesting that US or NATO supplied missiles enabling a longer reach into Russia herself created the justification – would indeed justify a Russian nuclear response. This enhancement was intended to mirror the NATO doctrine that an “attack on one would be an attack on all” NATO members.

That Biden acted to allow Ukraine to strike targets within Russia, albeit only targets necessary to support Russia’s continued efforts to invade and conquer Ukraine – a hot topic for months – is probably just as related to the ascension of Donald Trump – an opponent of our support for Ukraine and an open admirer of Putin – and what many are saying is a very short fuse on continue American support. If there is to be a ceasefire and a notion of parties keeping the territory they hold, Ukraine’s conquest of Russia’s Kursk region just might be a bargaining chip for Ukraine’s trading for some of Russia’s conquest of Ukraine areas.

In the end, if there is to be any near-term armistice or other peace accord to settle this ugly war, one really hotly contested issue concerns a necessary Russian pledge to honor the agreed border with Ukraine. Russia has abrogated its treaty with Ukraine to start this war, and her promises are always met with skepticism. As much as Russia justifies this aggression as a response to NATO itself and demands that as any condition of peace requires that Ukraine agree not to join NATO, the only enforceable guarantee of Ukraine’s sovereignty is if she becomes united within NATO’s protective treaty system.

Would Putin really resort to nuclear weapons to further his goals? With Trump’s open bromance with Putin, his disdain for Zelensky and Ukraine, is the President elect willing to sacrifice a threatened democracy in favor the expansion of an avaricious autocrat’s dream territorial expansion? Preserving democracy does not appear to be a Trump priority… anywhere.

I’m Peter Dekom, and there are just too many Americans who do not care if US policies no long support democracy… even as our economic well-being and global influence rely heavily on open relationships with free nations everywhere.