Andrew Korybko writes at Substack…
Russia cannot afford to have its adversaries capture and hold Belarusian territory because of the national security threat that this presents and also because it would greatly undermine its negotiating position.
Belarusian media reported last week about the West’s alleged plot to destabilize and then invade their country. Existing information warfare campaigns are meant to facilitate the recruitment of more sleeper cell agents, who’ll later stage a terrorist insurgency using Ukrainian-procured arms. Mercenaries will then invade from the south, carry out drone strikes against strategic targets, and attempt to seize the capital. If they succeed, then the coup authorities will request a conventional NATO military intervention.
Here are over a dozen background briefings about this scenario over the past year and a half:
* 25 May 2023: “NATO Might Consider Belarus To Be ‘Low-Hanging Fruit’ During Kiev’s Upcoming Counteroffensive”
* 1 June 2023: “The Union State Expects That The NATO-Russian Proxy War Will Expand”
* 14 June 2023: “Lukashenko Strongly Hinted That He Expects Belgorod-Like Proxy Incursions Against Belarus”
* 14 December 2023: “Belarus Is Bracing For Belgorod-Like Terrorist Incursions From Poland”
* 19 February 2024: “The Western-Backed Foreign-Based Belarusian Opposition Is Plotting Territorial Revisions”
* 21 February 2024: “Is The West Plotting A False Flag Provocation In Poland To Blame On Russia & Belarus?”
* 26 April 2024: “Analyzing Belarus’ Claim Of Recently Thwarting Drone Attacks From Lithuania”
* 30 June 2024: “Keep An Eye On Ukraine’s Military Buildup Along The Belarusian Border”
* 12 August 2024: “What’s Behind Belarus’ Military Buildup Along The Ukrainian Border?”
* 13 August 2024: “Security Threats To Belarus”
* 19 August 2024: “Ukraine Reportedly Has A Whopping 120,000 Troops Deployed Along Its Border With Belarus”
* 26 August 2024: “Ukraine Might Be Gearing Up To Attack Or Cut Off Belarus’ Southeastern City Of Gomel”
* 28 September 2024: “Belarus’ Warning About Using Nukes Probably Isn’t A Bluff (But There Might Be A Catch)”
This summer’s Ukrainian invasion of Russia’s Kursk Region might also have emboldened the plotters.
No nuclear retaliation from Russia followed despite the threat that this NATO-backed attack posed to its territorial integrity. Likewise, they might calculate that neither Russia nor Belarus (which hosts the former’s tactical nukes) would resort to these means if they replicated that scenario in the latter, especially if the invasion also came from Ukraine instead of NATO countries like Poland. This could give the West more leverage in upcoming peace talks with Russia if it succeeds.
That might sound reasonable on paper, but in practice, it ignores the fact that Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine just entered into force and that Putin responded to Ukraine’s use of Western long-range missiles by employing the state-of-the-art hypersonic medium-range Oreshnik missile in combat. The first allows the use of nuclear weapons in response to the sort of threats that this scenario poses while the second was meant as a signal to the West that Putin is finally climbing the escalation ladder.
Taken together, the latest developments indicate that Russia’s response to an unconventional mercenary invasion of Belarus and/or a conventional Ukrainian one might be different than its response to Kursk, and this could serve as the tripwire for the Cuban-like brinksmanship crisis that’s been brewing. Russia cannot afford to have its adversaries capture and hold Belarusian territory because of the national security threat that this presents and also because it would greatly undermine its negotiating position…
Continue this analysis at Substack
READ MORE UKRAINE NEWS AT: 21st CENTURY WIRE UKRAINE FILES
ALSO JOIN OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL
SUPPORT OUR INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV
