It’s clear that the Russian military is determined to ‘liberate’ Donbass, but what is its actual goal? The Russian military, backed by the Kremlin, controls 54% of Donetsk and 93% of the Luhansk region in Ukraine. But what is its real war goal? The Russian General Staff’s Main Operational Directorate chief, Sergei Rudskoi, has said it is “limited” in its objectives. He has not ruled out using nuclear weapons, and the military isn’t ready to abandon Donbass.
Russia’s limited war goal to ‘liberate’ Donbass
Moscow is focusing its military operation on eastern Donbass, where pro-Russian separatist enclaves exist. As a result, the Russian military operation is largely over, but Moscow is not done yet. There is still much more work to do in driving Ukraine’s forces out of eastern Donbass. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s sounds more confident than it has in months.
Russian military officials have denied claiming partial victory in Donbas. The Ukrainian president’s offer to negotiate peace terms with Putin was rejected by the Russian president. Russia has repeatedly suggested that Ukraine should cede Donbas as part of its surrender deal. This is contrary to its stated primary war objective. In fact, Russia recently announced the refocus of its military on Donbas, although they continued their offensive against Ukrainian troops in the east.
Despite its claims, the Russian military’s performance has been horrendous. The main target of Russia’s war on Ukraine has been the city of Mariupol. This is despite the fact that it has already managed to seize control of parts of the city. In other words, Russia’s limited war goal to ‘liberate’ Donbass is a clumsy strategy that might result in even higher casualties.
The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has been vague in his descriptions of his military goals in the Ukraine. The Russians have captured a third of the country since February 24 and have expanded this area with their forces. The Ukrainians, however, have put up a much stronger resistance than Putin probably expected. In addition, the Russian forces’ morale is reportedly low. They are also largely disadvantaged by weak logistics and flagging morale.
The West has responded with threats of retaliatory military action. President Vladimir Putin has also called the West aggressive and compared the situation to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. The secretary general of Nato has also warned of the threat of conflict. As a result, US officials know that Russia is boosting its forces near Ukraine but have been unable to explain their reasons. In addition to increasing their force, Russian troops have also moved into Belarus for military exercises. Russia’s deputy foreign minister has compared the situation to the Cuban missile crisis.
While Russia has a legitimate war aim of ‘liberating’ the Donbass region, there is no indication that this is the primary reason for their military action. In addition to being a war to ‘liberate’ Donbass, Russia has a limited war goal of ‘liberating’ the Donbass region. That doesn’t mean that the Russian military won’t expand its operations in the future, but it is not consistent with its own actions on the ground.
In the meantime, the Russian military continues to expand its military operation in eastern Ukraine, destroying Ukraine’s infrastructure and tying down Ukrainian forces. Since March 2, 1,351 Russian soldiers have been killed and another 3,825 injured. According to Ukraine’s military, the Russian soldiers have lost over 15,000 lives in the conflict. However, Ukraine has claimed that the actual number of Russian military deaths is 10 times higher.
It has killed at least 1,189 civilians
The UN says that at least 1,189 civilians have been killed and another 1,901 have been injured in the conflict. The actual death toll is likely higher, however, because the conflict has led to a mass exodus of Ukrainians, including millions of internally displaced people. The war has also triggered one of the largest refugee waves in history, with the number of refugees approaching 4 million.
The UN Human Rights Office says that the death toll has likely been higher. UN staff have limited access to some of the hardest-hit areas of Ukraine. The UN’s ACLED database includes geographic information about the deaths and provides the first indication of which cities and regions in Ukraine have sustained the heaviest casualties. Some areas have been hit particularly hard by Russian attacks, particularly Mariupol and Kyiv.
Several reasons have been cited for Putin’s attacks in Ukraine, including questions about Ukraine’s legitimacy. He has also claimed that the country must be liberated from Nazis. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has vowed to stay in Kyiv and continue fighting Russian forces. The conflict has killed at least 1,189 civilians and caused at least 500,000 refugees.
In addition to the civilian casualties, Russian military forces have also targeted medical facilities and other non-military targets, such as schools, hospitals, and administrative buildings. According to Bachelet, 77 medical facilities were damaged or destroyed. The Associated Press, one of the few news organizations to have access to the area, reported that a pregnant woman and her child were killed.
The Russian Defense Ministry has suspended all military operations in and around Donbas, but said it is now focusing on the final stage of the operation to liberate the region. The Pentagon says this move is not proof that Russia is serious about ending the attacks. But Moscow said it is simply a sign of good faith in the negotiations. And if it continues, it could be a catalyst for the Ukraine to regain its independence.
It has not ruled out using nuclear weapons
The Kremlin has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear force to deter the Western powers from intervening in Ukraine’s affairs. The Kremlin’s spokesman refused to rule out the use of nuclear weapons in the conflict in eastern Ukraine, saying “we will consider this option if there is a national existential threat against us.” And the head of Russia’s space agency has issued a chilling warning: “We will not tolerate any threat to the peace and stability of the world.”
During the Ukraine war, Putin ordered the deployment of nuclear forces in ‘enhanced combat duty’ to ‘protect our people’. Peskov also denied that the Russian military had targeted civilians during its operation. He also denied rumors about setbacks, and that a number of civilians have been killed. The statement contradicts the reports by independent bodies that indicate Russian military forces have targeted civilians in Ukraine.
Putin’s escalation of nuclear weapons is highly provocative. It contradicts statements made during the Cold War and just a few months ago. Furthermore, it demonstrates the fallacy that nuclear deterrence is a tool of peace and stability. Nuclear weapon states have used their arsenals to conduct proxy wars and conventional aggression. This is an irresponsible response to Ukraine’s actions.
As the Ukraine crisis intensifies, the risks of the conflict escalating to NATO borders are increasing. A nuclear war could escalate to a larger scale and lead to more Western involvement and escalation. Vladimir Putin’s threat of nuclear war has led to a knee-jerk reaction from many people in the United States and the West. The jargon of nuclear-deterrence-theory fills our social media and political debate.
The Ukraine crisis is about more than just military bases and weapons. It is about Russia’s rejection of post-Cold War Europe and the sovereignty of Ukraine. The West and other international actors are condemning Russia’s actions. They are also denying their own military intervention, which might lead to a direct confrontation with Russia. This crisis has a wider political dimension.
Nevertheless, the Russian president has not ruled out using nuclear weapons in the conflict, despite recent warnings by NATO. This option is more difficult to justify, and many experts believe the Russians do not have any valid reason to use them. According to Paul Hare, senior lecturer in global studies at Boston University, Putin’s goal is to “swallow Ukraine” and restore its historic power. “There is no good reason for Putin to initiate a nuclear exchange, as a nuclear war will render him a pariah,”
The risk of a nuclear war is much lower than if NATO were to get involved in Ukraine’s conflict. Still, the war in Ukraine has brought nuclear war into the public eye. While it may be a ‘one-shot’ war, it would still be far better than nothing. With nuclear weapons, both sides can quickly and easily destroy each other and their own country.
