The Kremlin is burying itself deeper and deeper - opinion

Why is it interesting that U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham responded harshly to Dmitry Medvedev's latest threat to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine?

Read also: Retired Russian colonel proposes blowing up the North Pole to send message to the West

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican, has responded to Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of the Security Council of the aggressor country of Russia, who threatened to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine. According to the American politician, the use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine would be an attack on NATO itself. "To my Russian friends who are talking about the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine: You have to understand that this would be an attack on NATO itself, given Ukraine's proximity to NATO territory," he wrote on Twitter.

Here we have to understand that Graham is a veteran of the Senate. That is, he belongs to an informal Areopagus. He remembers the collapse of the Soviet Union, how it all happened, how Russia was defeated. He knows what to say to Russians.

Read also: Medvedev says Russia could use nuclear weapons to ‘end war in matter of days’

Even before the start of the counteroffensive operations in the south, Lindsey Graham came to Ukraine and said that the way America is helping Ukraine, all these billions of dollars of military aid, is the best investment, perhaps, in the history of the country in destroying the enemies of the United States. At such a low cost to the United States, without direct intervention in the conflict, the threat to Americans is being reduced. Moscow's response to this was so strong that it could be heard as far away as Beijing. They then began to shout that America was preparing for World War III and all that.

The second point is: why do people in the West pay attention to Dmitry Medvedev?

Medvedev used to be the Prime Minister and even President of Russia, and was considered in the West to be a representative of the so-called "liberal wing" of the Russian regime, as they thought at the time. It is clear that they were sorely mistaken. But he is a person who is close to Putin and should be listened to. When he says something, you have to listen. He also broadcasts the Kremlin's ideas.

What is interesting about the current situation with Graham's response to Medvedev? The deputy secretary of the Russian Security Council, ex-President Medvedev, was actually demoted to the level of a United States senator. There is such an important thing here - in information, formal and informal interstate communications, who communicates with whom.

Read also: A Tricky Game for the Kremlin? Now it is Clear what Putin is Doing — opinion

In other words, Medvedev was effectively told to speak only with one of the hundred U.S. senators. This is your level. This is how we take you "seriously." This again emphasizes how the United States is unafraid of these political statements. In fact, the United States has enough technical and intelligence means to monitor the territory of Russia 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and any movements around, near, towards, or away from the so-called nuclear facilities, whether they are mines or storage facilities for all these nuclear arsenals. US officials very carefully weigh their political decisions at a high level, whether it's the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, or the US General Staff. Therefore, when such statements are made about certain nuclear moves by Russia at this level, it already indicates some grounds for concern and some preparations.

When Lindsey Graham talks about the nuclear threat, it is simply the United States once again showing the Russian leaders' place and at what level they will communicate with them. They are demonstrating that they realize that this is a bluff. Any sound from Medvedev is a bluff that should not be taken seriously.

Another interesting point: Republican Lindsey Graham, together with Democrat Richard Blumenthal, Senator from Connecticut, co-authored a congressional resolution that says that an attack on Ukraine with nuclear weapons should be considered an attack on NATO with a corresponding response. Of course, this is a political resolution, not a law. But if Congress adopts the resolution, it is not customary for the executive branch to ignore such things. It is a political instruction to act. If the executive branch ignores it, it should go to Congress and explain why it has a different opinion. It would also have to happen publicly in front of the Senate and in front of the entire American people. So now, look at the situation.

The Kremlin is burying itself deeper and deeper with missile strikes and drone attacks on our cities. For example, they launched an Iskander at Kryvyi Rih. People were killed – a terrible tragedy. Let's compare this to another situation that happened on September 11, 2001. When airplanes also hit office buildings, thousands died in New York. It was a colossal tragedy. What did the Americans do with the organizer of these attacks? They found him and killed him. It was a terrorist act. And then, tell me, from the point of view of American voters, how does that act in New York differ from what they did in Kryvyi Rih, what they did in Mariupol, and what they did in many cities? There is no difference. It is the same act of terrorism. That's why the Senators are right. They say: here we have a terrorist who must be destroyed before he destroys humanity. The executive branch has to do something about it.

The Biden administration will not be able to get away with it for long. That's why the United States has a very serious, interesting internal dialog. It involves serious people from the Pentagon, the State Department, and the Central Intelligence Agency. The Kremlin should have no illusions that there are no plans to destroy Putin. Putin can be destroyed in the same way as bin Laden, just by different means.

The main argument is that Ukraine is not a NATO member, and no one has any obligations to Ukraine. But, I'm sorry, the NATO text is not strictly tied to each country. The point is that each country acts as it can. Each country fights as hard as it can.

Read also: ‘Paralyzed’ Putin did nothing despite knowing of Wagner rebellion in advance – Washington Post

During the Cold War, it was clear what awaited the Soviet Union. An attack on West Berlin, or small Denmark, or any small Italian island, it doesn't matter if it's Greek or Turkish territory, it would be a war with the whole of NATO. The point is that if Putin is allowed to break Ukraine or destroy Ukraine, he will not stop. He will go further and destroy further, continuing to use nuclear blackmail.

Let's be honest; if Putin is not stopped, it only means that nuclear blackmail is working for him. That all these talks about nuclear weapons are working. Then China will use nuclear blackmail to take over Taiwan. A whole host of other things then arise. Iran will use nuclear weapons allowed to it by Russia. The world could simply explode. There are people in the American establishment, both in the Senate and in the government, who say that if we don't stop Putin now, we will face a crisis that we simply cannot digest or that we will not survive. So we need to be proactive.

That is why there is this discussion about inviting Ukraine to NATO, and the sooner it happens (there is talk of a deadline for the Washington NATO summit), the less risk that the whole world will be drawn into a nuclear catastrophe. On the other hand, there is no need to harbor illusions. There is still another side in the United States. There is Trump, who says that this is all nonsense and that it is possible to reconcile Zelenskyy with Putin. Such talk is a threat to us. We must also work systematically and not only at the state level to counter this threat.

We’re bringing the voice of Ukraine to the world. Support us with a one-time donation, or become a Patron!

Read the original article on The New Voice of Ukraine