In a Sept. 15 article titled “Vladimir Putin’s War Is Failing. The West Should Help It Fail Faster,” The Economist British-based weekly magazine makes the argument for much more rapid escalation in NATO’s war against Russia. After retailing the media spin about “sky high” Ukrainian morale, with citizens joining the army in droves, while Russia is failing and all their troops are dying and demoralized, The Economist makes the push for sending long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine, whose 300 km range would allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russian territory: “The West should, therefore, reinforce success. Ukraine has shown that it can use Western weapons to regain territory; the West should send better ones, such as longer-range ATACMS munitions for the HIMARS launchers that have proved so effective, which it previously hesitated to supply.”
Now, in case one worries about an escalation, such as, for instance, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s statement last week that warned if the U.S. supplied ATACMS to Ukraine it would mean the U.S. had “become a direct party to the conflict,” and Russia “will be forced to respond appropriately,” The Economist has an answer: “To avoid escalation, advanced NATO weapons should not be fired into Russia; Ukraine will surely comply rather than alienate its arms supplier.” Quite a big statement to put the hinging of World War III on those measured and thoughtful Ukrainians!
