Russia calls for mobilisation

Seven months after Russia invaded Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday ordered Russia’s first mobilisation since World War II. He also resolved to use nuclear weapons in the conflict in order to ‘protect’ his country and people. ‘If the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will without doubt use all available means to protect Russia and our people… This is not a bluff,’ Putin said. The threat to escalate the conflict, with the mobilisation of some 3 lakh additional troops, came after Russia suffered several military setbacks in the recent weeks — the Ukrainians claim to have retaken 3,500 square miles of land, including the cities of Izyum and Kupiansk, important supply hubs for Russian forces.

Though the number of actual fatalities is a matter of conjecture, Ukraine claims that its forces have killed 50,000 Russian troops while losing nearly 9,000 of their own personnel until the end of August. In the same month, the US Department of Defence estimated that the Russians had suffered ‘70,000-80,000 casualties’, including injuries and deaths. Ukraine has been able to fight back only due to the regular supply of sophisticated weaponry from NATO countries. Putin has been pushed into a corner, being isolated at the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit, in which even friendly nations such as China and India did not support him. Western analysts believe that losses on the ground and the diminishing prospects of a military victory have made Putin reiterate his nuclear warfare threat, which he first made in February.

Reports from European capitals show that Putin’s threat is being treated as a bluff made by a desperate dictator — diplomats from various countries have reiterated the determination to arm and finance Ukraine’s resistance. Unfortunately, western analysts and diplomats are unsympathetic to Russia’s genuine security concerns: NATO has added 14 new members since the German reunification in 1990, even though western leaders had, on several occasions in the early 1990s, verbally assured the Russians about the limits of NATO’s eastward expansion — without giving written guarantees. While Putin can’t be absolved of blame in the devastation of Ukraine, those western hawks who worked for aggressive containment of Russia in the last three decades also bear moral responsibility for this unfolding tragedy.