We could be on the verge of a nuclear war in Ukraine (although I believe that none of the actors involved are interested in doing it) and as often happens, although the situation has been degenerating for years, "tapulli" are used as hasty dispatch of weapons or sanctions as if there was no tomorrow (does it make sense to exclude Russian athletes from the Winter Paralympics ...?).
I have been working and interested in defense issues for many years, and there may be dozens of reflections on the ongoing crisis to debate. I don't like stadium support, but unfortunately in recent decades it seems to have become impossible to discuss complex phenomena in an articulated way and taking into consideration the history, geopolitics, economics and the many (different) interests involved; and more simply we resort to the well-established division between "good and bad" (we have been doing this since '43).
I will focus on a point that has not been taken into consideration by any analyst at the moment and I will start from the old (and very current) adage "Si vis pacem, parabellum".
Deterrence has always been a weapon that has guaranteed a pseudo-peace, or at least degenerate into a nuclear conflict between great powers. A country that has Armed Forces is not attacked. structured, credible and well armed. It would simply be a suicidal act.
From the 2014 coup it was clear that Russia would not allow it to have another pro-Western neighbor or even a NATO member.
Sending weapons now to balance an ongoing war is in this case a duty to support the attack, but will cause the conflict to prolong and more casualties for both sides. However, if they had been sufficiently armed beforehand, making a possible invasion by the Russians more risky, costly and uncertain, the latter would have thought about it much more. But Italy, through the office in charge of issuing export licenses, has well thought of denying any authorization for the export of war material to Ukraine in recent years, which could indeed have contributed in a structured way to the increase of deterrence to Russia.
Then, if we had not banned Ukraine's right to self-defense by banning the export of military equipment, Ukraine could have created greater deterrence by making (perhaps) Russian aggression unlikely.
Now, however, when the war is unleashed, the weapons sent in haste will contribute to exacerbate the conflict and make it more bloody. Perhaps it was necessary to think about it first, and start doing more "realpolitik" in the interest of Italy.
C. Saltamontes
Frame: RAI
