According to the head of NATO's military committee, Rob Bauer, if Russia did not have nuclear weapons, then the forces of the Alliance would have expelled the invaders from Ukraine a long time ago.
Points of attention
- NATO is restrained by Russian nuclear weapons, which makes it impossible to introduce troops to expel the occupiers from Ukraine.
- The war against the Russian Federation is different from operations in Afghanistan.
- Decisions to provide arms to Ukraine were complicated by allies' hesitations and fears about the Kremlin's reaction.
NATO is deterred by Russian nuclear weapons
Journalists asked the general whether now is the time to expand aid to Ukraine.
First of all, it is about the introduction of troops of Western allies to the Ukrainian front to deter Russian aggression.
According to Rob Bauer, fighting in Afghanistan is not the same as fighting the Russians in Ukraine.
The Taliban did not have nuclear weapons. The Russians have it. But again, I'm not saying it's "impossible". However, we as an Alliance see this risk, and a political discussion is needed (...): are we ready for such a risk?
Rob Bauer
Head of the NATO Military Committee
Why was Ukraine so slowly provided with weapons?
Rob Bauer pointed out that now that Ukraine has already received almost the entire range of weapons, up to the F-16, it is logical to ask why it took so long to decide on this.
According to the general, when the full-scale war was just beginning, Kyiv's allies really hesitated where the Kremlin's "red lines" were.
The general also emphasized that there is no point in looking back and saying that those fears were foolish.
But if it's your responsibility to take the risk, that's a different conversation... I'm absolutely convinced that if Russia didn't have nuclear weapons, we'd already be in Ukraine to get them out of there. But they have nuclear weapons. So it's not the same as Afghanistan, Rob Bauer said.
