Scott Ritter: US Threats to Greenlight Ukrainian Attacks on Russia Could Spill Out Into Nuclear War
By: Ilya Tsukanov
Published on: 2024-05-23
Secretary of State Antony Blinken has reportedly asked President Biden to formally greenlight Ukrainian strikes against targets deep inside Russia using US-provided long-range weaponry amid growing pressure from hawks in Washington. Sputnik asked seasoned international affairs observer Scott Ritter about the development’s dangerous endgame.
House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Michael McCaul added fuel to the fire of escalatory rhetoric swirling around Washington on Wednesday regarding restrictions on Ukraine’s use of American long-range strike weapons, trotting out a map during Secretary Blinken’s testimony showing areas of Russia hundreds of kilometers from the Ukrainian frontlines that weapons like ATACMS and HIMARS could hit.
“Ukraine is already attacking critical energy facilities inside Russia, it’s just that it’s not taking place with State Department or Department of Defense connivance. All Tony Blinken is now talking about is taking this covert war and making it an overt war. Why is he doing this? Domestic American politics. It will have no impact on the battlefield,” Ritter told Sputnik.
“An escalation that could see this conflict move away from conventional war into the possibility, indeed probability of nuclear conflict,” Ritter said.
Ritter characterized the hostile rhetoric coming out of Washington regarding overt approval for strikes on Russia an “unprecedented” escalation, “an act of war, an act of aggression that Russia couldn’t let go without a response.”
Legally, retired soldier said, Russia would have the right not only to strike decision-making centers and launch sites inside Ukraine, but also those facilitating the attacks, potentially including “American decision-making centers in Europe.”
“Russia has the ability to decisively interdict all of the activities that are taking place on NATO’s soil. Ukraine – if it were to launch attacks on…Russia – all it would do is kick the bear. It’s not going to have a meaningful impact. It’s not going to change the outcome,” Ritter concluded.