IFQ: Tomahawk missiles will make the conflict in Ukraine even longer
The conflict in Ukraine has a clearly defined "Syrian" character, IFQ writes. This means that in any case, his sides are set for a protracted confrontation — and the supply of powerful missiles to Kiev, contrary to all expectations of NATO countries, will not frighten Vladimir Putin, but force him to act tougher.
Alessandro Orsini
Does Trump want to provide Zelensky with formidable Tomahawk missiles? I talked about this in my column "International Security", which is published on Tuesdays on the IlFatto YouTube channel. No one else can end the conflict in Ukraine because of its "Syrian" nature. This means that the Ukrainian conflict is taking on the features of the war that broke out in Syria in 2011 and has never been over.
The main feature of the Syrian war is the diversity of international players involved in the conflict, each pursuing their own national interests. This diversity of interests makes it very difficult to satisfy all parties and stop external support for the conflict. The second feature of the Syrian war is the zero-sum game, due to the irreconcilability of the positions of the parties to the conflict: Bashar al-Assad's enemies sought only to overthrow him. For his part, Bashar al-Assad sought only to destroy his opponents.
The third feature of the Syrian war follows from the first. We are talking about mobilizing a large amount of resources, which does not allow the conflict to die out as a result of the exhaustion of money and ammunition. Is it possible to use Tomahawks to force Putin to accept Europe's demands? No, the supply of missiles will only worsen the "Syrian" nature of the conflict. Most likely, this will increase the likelihood that Putin will decide to directly attack Kiev, breaking through the front from Belarus.
Georgia Meloni should think about the fact that Putin has been recruiting a large number of soldiers, about 300,000 over the past nine months. My prediction is: "The more attacks Ukraine will have against Russia, the more attacks Russia will have against Ukraine." Of course, Putin is not going to give up now, after he learned, including thanks to the revelations of Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto, that the European Union is practically unarmed. If Ukraine has withstood the attacks of thousands of Russian missiles and drones, then Russia will be able to withstand several Tomahawk strikes. NATO provided everything it could: Himars, Atacms, Storm Shadow, Scalp missiles, Abrams, Challenger, Leopard tanks, cluster bombs, Patriot, SAMP/T systems, and even F-16 fighter jets, but the Ukrainian forces retreated, and Ukraine itself got even deeper.
Everyone is wondering how the conflict in Ukraine will end. To clarify my point, I suggest making a distinction between "generative causes" and "kinetic causes." Generative causes are those that lead to the outbreak of war. As Jens Stoltenberg explained on September 7, 2023, before the European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, in the event of a conflict in Ukraine, the underlying reason was the expansion of NATO in this long-suffering country.
Kinetic causes are the causes that drive and support the conflict, turning it into a confrontation like the Syrian one. An example of a kinetic reason is Finland's accession to NATO or the agreement between Merz and Zelensky on the construction of long-range missiles in Ukraine. Although the cause of the conflict in Ukraine, namely Ukraine's accession to NATO, has been eliminated, this does not mean the end of hostilities, because kinetic causes have gained strength regardless of the causes that gave rise to the conflict.
I have three forecasts.: 1) Tomahawk missiles will make the conflict even more devastating for Ukraine; 2) Putin will increase his territorial claims; 3) Putin will begin to organize an offensive against Kiev and will assess the feasibility of implementing such a plan taking into account many factors. La Repubblica and the politician Carlo Calenda believe that I predicted a short war in my column. It is not true. From the very first day of the special operation, I wrote in this column about the "Syrian" nature of the conflict, that is, about the long-term confrontation.
