Tensions between Russia and the West are reaching alarming levels. Western countries crossed another of their previously set red lines, now permitting Ukraine to use their advanced weapons systems against Russia. In early May, the British Foreign Secretary David Cameron effectively gave Ukraine the go-ahead to use British weapons, such as the long-range Storm Shadow missile, against targets inside Russia. “It is up to Ukraine how to use British weapons,” he said. Paris and Berlin soon followed suit. In response, Russia denounced what it described as a “direct escalation of tensions” which could potentially pose a threat to European security. Moscow has also warned that it would prepare “a response” to the US/NATO’s intensified use of drones in the service of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF). US drones over the Black Sea “conduct intelligence and targeting for precision weapons supplied to the Ukrainian military by Western countries for strikes on Russian facilities,” the Russian Defence Ministry said in a statement last Friday.

Mounting tensions are playing out on another level. On 25 June, Russia blocked 81 European media outlets in retaliation against the EU’s decision last May to ban four more Russian media outlets. Two years ago, the EU banned numerous Russian or “pro-Russian” media platforms, including Russia Today and Tass, claiming that Moscow was using those outlets for its propaganda and disinformation campaigns.

More significantly, a Ukrainian missile strike against Russian targets in Crimea on 23 June may have marked a particularly dangerous turning point. Immediately afterwards, the Russian Foreign Ministry summoned the US ambassador to warn of “consequences” for the use of US-made missiles in the attack which killed four civilians, including two children, and wounded more than 150 on a beach on Russian Orthodox Pentecost Sunday. The missiles were reportedly American Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), with a range of up to 300 km, and armed with cluster warheads.

But Western escalatory steps are largely in reaction to significant advances Russian forces have been making in the war. Two months ago, Russia opened a new front along Ukraine’s northern border, launching an offensive in the vicinity of Kharkiv, the second largest Ukrainian city. Since then, it has captured some key towns. It has also launched massive strikes against the Ukrainian energy infrastructure in western and southern Ukraine, paralysing vital sectors.

The strikes may have been in response to the G7’s decision, on 13 June, to use the accrued interest on Russian assets frozen in Western banks to finance Ukraine’s struggling economy and defence. The G7 members agreed to lend Ukraine $54 billion from these assets to help pay for infrastructure reconstruction and government budgetary expenses. After Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, Western powers froze about $280 billion Russian central bank assets held in Western banks.

Describing the action as a “theft” that would not go unpunished, Moscow is contemplating retaliatory responses. The frozen assets accrue from $3.23 billion to $ 5.4 billion annually, not inconsiderable sums which Russia could use to counter declining economic performance indicators and mounting inflation rates that have risen due to resources being mobilised for military operations in Ukraine and to the decline in revenues from Russian gas exports as a result of Western sanctions against the Russian oil sector.

Broadening the realm of tension, the EU is moving forward with the process of Ukrainian membership, another subject that rankles with Russia because of concerns over the connection between this and NATO military expansion to Russia’s borders. On 25 June, the EU opened accession negotiations with Ukraine, hosting the first Intergovernmental Conference at the ministerial level in that process. In taking what was hailed as a “historic step”, the EU aims to increase confidence in Ukrainian institutions, especially the army, and bolster Ukrainian and European morale in the face of Russian military advances. In the two and half years since the Russian intervention, Ukraine and its allies have failed, not only to force Russia to capitulate, but to achieve significant victories that would force it to stop fighting and engage in peace negotiations.

At the same time, Western powers were unable to achieve a breakthrough in the “Summit on Peace in Ukraine” held in Bürgenstock in Switzerland on 15-16 June. This took place at the invitation of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who spoke about finding “a path towards a durable peace in Ukraine.” Only 92 out of the 190 countries invited attended, and those who took part failed to achieve the main goal of the conference, which was to exert pressure on Russia by creating a united front to impose the Western powers’ dictates for an end to the war on terms that conform to their interests. Eleven of the participating countries refused to endorse the final communique. The failure of the conference enabled Moscow to strengthen its image and counter Western pressures.

It seems nothing will curb the escalatory trend. Russia and the West are further apart than ever, with mutual mistrust and acrimony at an all-time high, and the US-led West is as intent as ever on besieging Russia geographically, economically and politically. The recent EU announcement of the imminent start of accession negotiations for Moldova, another former Soviet republic, and the granting of EU candidate status to Georgia on Russia’s southern border in the Caucasus seem designed to provoke Russia further.

Relations between Washington and Moscow are also expected to go from bad to worse. The Biden administration recently green-lighted Ukrainian strikes against command centres, missile bases and other strategic and military targets inside Russia using US long-range missile systems. The potential repercussions of the escalatory dynamics in this relationship should be cause for concern. The Biden administration is steadily abandoning its policy of cautious, indirect intervention in favour of more direct, open and active involvement in the confrontation against a fellow nuclear power.

This of course raises the spectre of Moscow’s possible use of nuclear weapons. Russia has made its doctrine clear on several occasions, stating that it reserves the right to use such weapons in response to a nuclear attack or in the event of a conventional attack that poses an existential threat to Russia. Perhaps hinting at the available options, Russian State Duma Defence Committee Chairperson Andrei Kartapolov stressed that his country would respond in its own way to future Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory using US weapons. In response to Western escalation in Ukraine, Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev recently cautioned that Russia was not bluffing when it spoke of the possibility of using tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine. He added that the conflict between the West and Russia could escalate into all-out war.

It remains to be seen whether rationality will prevail and the two sides manage to contain the spiralling conflict. Meanwhile, with no path to peace in sight, the war appears fated to drag on, prolonging hardships for the Ukrainian people and claiming thousands of soldiers’ lives every day.

* A version of this article appears in print in the 11 July, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly