Main Edition
US
FR
November 20, 2024 - 10:00am
Assuming that the damage just inflicted on internet cables beneath the Baltic Sea was the work of Russia (for which there is yet no direct evidence), this should be seen in conjunction with the decision by the Biden administration to allow the Ukrainians to fire US missiles deep into Russian territory. The British and French governments are reported to be following suit. American ATACMS missiles have already struck the Russian region of Bryansk.
Russia has repeatedly declared that because these missiles are guided onto their targets by US technology under US control, such strikes would be regarded as a direct attack by Nato on Russia, to which Russia would have to respond. Vladimir Putin has come under strong criticism from Russian hardliners for allowing previous “red lines” to be crossed.
A number of factors are however inhibiting a Russian response (let alone an escalation towards the use of nuclear weapons). First, although damaging, these missiles will not seriously affect the course of the war, which is now running strongly in Russia’s favour. Second, precisely because they remain under US control, the Kremlin seems fairly confident at present that they will be restricted to the region around the Kursk battlefield, and not directed against civilian targets in Russia. Last, and most importantly, Moscow is anxious not to fall into the trap that it thinks has been set for it by the Biden administration: that of retaliating against US targets, and thereby wrecking the chance of an advantageous peace deal with the incoming Trump administration.
At the same time, it would be surprising if Putin did not feel the need to do something in response, if only to deter the West from reducing its present limitations on Ukrainian use of Western weapons. One obvious strategy, which has been discussed by Russian commentators, would be to help America’s enemies in the Middle East with missiles and satellite intelligence to guide them. On the other hand, this would also endanger talks with the Trump administration; for while President-elect and his team seem genuinely anxious for a peace deal in Ukraine, they are slavishly attached to Israel and possessed of an almost feral hatred of Iran.
The Russians therefore might see sabotage attacks in Europe, and especially against Britain, as a way of sending a warning without unnecessarily alienating Trump — for whom concern for the wellbeing of allies has hardly been a leading characteristic. Recent months have seen a series of sabotage actions in Western Europe, though these have been very small and ineffective. It has been reported that a Chinese ship was tracked in the waters near where the most recent cable cuts took place. But given the coming tariff war the US will wage on China, and the threat that the EU may join the US, China has nothing to gain from a move like this.
If these were the work of Russia and not “false flag” operations by Ukraine to provoke greater hostility to Russia in the West, then it seems likely that they were intended not to do damage, but as warnings to the West. If so, Russia may now feel impelled to make good on those warnings and engage in serious sabotage against European Nato members, and especially against the UK and France.
This raises the question of why, after worrying obsessively about the risk of a Trump administration “abandoning Europe”, the British and French governments want to stick their countries’ necks out in this way just before Trump actually takes power. After all, Trump’s supporters see Biden’s move as a wholly illegitimate pre-emptive strike (by an administration that now lacks a democratic mandate) to wreck the President-elect’s future Ukraine policy and bequeath him a deeper crisis with Russia, and they see the British and French as Biden’s accomplices in this.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribePutin think a lot about internet / communications in his tactical and strategic planning. One example that I find quite funny is when the EU (and then other countries) started implementing privacy laws like GDPR. Putin clearly already controls any element of “privacy” for Russian citizens, but nonetheless saw this as an opportunity to shore up his readiness for various war scenarios.
He knew way back then that many key industries in Russia are run by global companies. There are various ways in which the Russian economy and capabilities could be seriously degraded, such as if the west decided to block them from access to the internet. So Putin introduced his own “privacy” laws that were nothing to do with privacy at all. If you want to understand Russian “privacy” laws, they can be summarised something like this: All company systems must store all critical data on servers based in Russia, such that if access to the global internet was cut off, the company could continue to function locally.
So whilst we were worrying about whether people had consented to cookies being written to their browser cache, or people’s name and address being stored somewhere other than in a phone directory, Putin was preparing for various war scenarios. Both Putin and China are usually planning decades ahead, while our politicians are barely able yo plan 2 years ahead. Would I like to live in China or Russia, hell no. I’d prefer incompetent freedom over totalitarian rule. I guess the question is more about how long we can bumble along the path of continual decline until enough of the population starts to envy the competent dictators who aren’t spending all their time trying to destroy their own countries and their own history.
For several years (many, in fact) we have been learning that the West is populated by angels, while in the East (i.e. in Russia) all the devils have gathered. When something bad happens, anything, even when a housewife’s cooking fails, the Russians are to blame. Putin is to blame.
From a psychological point of view, it is extremely tiring and can generate the opposite effect…
So Russia feels free to rain death and destruction indiscriminately down on the independent, sovereign state it has brutally invaded, but is upset that Ukraine wants some capability to strike the source of those attacks because they come from across the border. Why would Ukraine want to strike “civilian targets in Russia” when what they want to do is defend themselves from military attacks?
And Russia has around 10,000 NK troops in the field not to mention Iranian, BK and Chinese weapons/components.
For those who downvoted that, yes indeed Ukraine should just surrender asap and let Russia take back that part of its empire (or what’s left of it after a couple of years of indiscriminate bombardment) it foolishly let return to the natives. It can then carry on and take back the rest of its former empire. How silly of me to suggest otherwise!
With respect that is not the point. The West has been fighting a proxy war against Russia. The West cannot really expect to sit on the sidelines supplying and funding Ukraine and claim non-combatant status.
It might not be in Russian interest to get drawn into open conflict with the West, but if they can sabotage us economically and damage our technological infrastructure or even arm and finance our enemies, including terrorists we cannot really have any cause for complaint
Russia knows it has been let of the hook so far by the west.
Really? Is it your view that a major nuclear armed power will lose and not resort to the use of those weapons?
The Baltic cables were cut several days prior to Biden’s missile announcement, so couldn’t have been caused by it unless Russia had advance knowledge. As for further sabotage, it certainly looks possible. Dirty tricks could put pressure on the West, as a useful alternative to an unwinnable nuclear war.
The Lieven family has served Russia for over three centuries. Nothing has changed.
More information please.