Could a frustrated Kremlin chief order the use of biological or chemical weapons? The West has already defined this as a red line without penalizing anyone who crosses it. For Putin, it was a sign of weakness.
The dictator Asad, who was sponsored by Putin, had repeatedly attacked his people with chemical weapons.
No one wants to paint the devil on the wall, and yet it needs to be talked about. What if Vladimir Putin, angry at the lack of military successes, resorts to weapons of mass destruction? NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg expressed this concern at the weekend an interview with the “Welt am Sonntag”. According to Stoltenberg, when Moscow spreads “absurd claims about chemical and biological weapons factories in Ukraine,” extreme caution is required.
On Friday, Russia called a meeting of the UN Security Council specifically to rant about the plague, cholera, anthrax and other diseases. Together with the United States, Kyiv is secretly producing deadly pathogens, Putin’s representative in New York claimed. That sounded somewhat insane, but was read by observers as the first step in a campaign that could actually use chemical or biological weapons.
False Flag?
The fear is that Russia could use the warfare agents itself and then point the finger at Ukraine, giving it an excuse to crack down on its neighbor. The Kremlin chief could certainly be expected to carry out such a false flag operation. Just remember the war in Syria, where the dictator Asad, who was sponsored by Putin, repeatedly attacked his people with chemical weapons. Syria and Russia had always blamed the attacks on the rebels. She could independent organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons Assign at least 25 poison gas operations to Asad’s army, which is supported by Russia.
Should Lutsk and Dnipro soon face horrors similar to those of East Ghouta and Khan Sheikhun? No one wants to imagine that, but talk of alleged poison kitchens in Ukraine has Americans and Europeans on edge. Everyone is saying that the use of chemical and biological weapons represents a breach of civilization (although Russia has already started bombing schools and hospitals without weapons of mass destruction). It is imperative that a red line be drawn for Putin before he uses his utmost.
However, that is exactly what the US did in Syria. In 2012, Barack Obama marked the use of poison gas as a red line and still did nothing when the regime dropped sarin bombs from helicopters. America subsequently lost credibility in the war, and Putin felt emboldened to later intervene brutally in Syria himself. Obviously he had nothing to fear from the West. Back then, nobody wanted to provoke a conflict between the major powers.
Obama’s disgrace
Joe Biden, Obama’s vice president at the time and current incumbent in the White House, has learned his lessons from the disgrace and has not yet shown Putin any new limits. Nevertheless, Washington and Brussels are saying that “every centimeter” of NATO territory will be defended. The alliance currently has its hands full arming its members and building a credible deterrent against Russia. The West is interfering in the Ukraine war with economic sanctions and arms deliveries, but not with its own troops.
Is it morally imperative to do more? Then the USA and NATO should also be aware of the consequences. Putin will rightly see another red line that goes unpunished as a sign of weakness. And what else does the West want to threaten if it names such a line? With participation in the fighting, which would put the West directly at war with Russia? It is essential to avoid this. Rather, the order of the day is to support Ukraine with all military aid and to cut off the air for the aggressor in the Kremlin using all economic and political means.
The Brussels correspondent Daniel Steinvorth Twitter follow.