Kremlin warns Nato over Ukraine convoys
THE Kremlin has warned it will launch attacks on Western weapons supplies to Ukraine, raising the prospect of a confrontation between Russia and Nato.
Shipments of anti-tank and antiaircraft missiles have been flooding into Ukraine from the United States, UK and allies, and the Pentagon indicated it was determined to send even more sophisticated weaponry in future.
But Sergei Ryabkov, the Russian deputy foreign minister, said: “We warned the United States that pumping Ukraine with weapons from several countries, orchestrated by them, is not just a dangerous move, but an action that turns the corresponding convoys into legitimate targets.”
Mr Ryabkov said Washington had not taken Moscow’s warnings seriously, and that there would be “consequences” for the “thoughtless transfer to Ukraine of weapons like manportable air defence systems, anti-tank missile systems and so on”.
The comments on state television were seen as, at the least, a Kremlin attempt to get the US to reduce weapons supplies, and at worst, an indication that Russia was prioritising hunting down convoys.
It came as Suella Braverman, the Attorney General, warned that ordinary Russian soldiers would face jail for war crimes committed in Ukraine.
Ahead of a trip to the International Criminal Court in The Hague tomorrow Dominic Raab, the Deputy Prime Minister, warned that “the politicians and military commanders responsible for ordering and carrying out atrocities in
Ukraine will effectively be condemned to spend the rest of their lives in Russia”.
Mr Ryabkov left open to interpretation whether he was talking about convoys on Ukrainian or Nato soil being “legitimate targets”.
Ms Braverman has warned that ordinary Russian soldiers would face jail for war crimes committed in Ukraine. Writing in The Sunday Telegraph, she said crimes carried out by political and military figures could be tried “in the courtrooms of Kyiv, The Hague or even in the UK”.
She added that Britain could take eyewitness evidence from Ukrainian refugees arriving in the country.
Hours after the Russian threat, the White House announced President Biden had authorised another $200million (£153 million) for the defence of Ukraine, including weapons.
The Pentagon made no immediate comment on what type of weapons would be included. It brought total US spending on security for Ukraine to $1.2 billion over the last year.
In advance of his trip to The Hague, Mr Raab said “the politicians and military commanders responsible for ordering and carrying out atrocities in Ukraine will effectively be condemned to spending the rest of their lives in Russia”.
He said: “If they travel to any country where the ICC is recognised, they should expect to face arrest, prosecution and many years behind bars.”
Meanwhile, Boris Johnson will host Nordic and Baltic leaders at Chequers tomorrow night, and for a summit in London on Tuesday, to discuss plans to cut the reliance of some countries on Russian energy, and to help Ukraine rebuild again after the war. Last night Mr Johnson said: “European security has been shaken by the attack of Russia on Ukraine, and alongside our partners, we will take action to ensure we emerge stronger and more united than before.”
General Lord Dannatt, former Chief of the General Staff, said: “The onus is on the West to supply it [military aid] in such a way that Russia can’t discover it so the supply lines can’t be targeted. Our response should be to get the stuff there in a much more covert way so it’s not discovered and attacked. I think we have to avoid general war, which could become a nuclear war, in every shape and form.”
Bob Seely, the Conservative MP, who sits on the Foreign Affairs Committee, said Russia would “attempt to prevent Western supply with the implied threat of escalation”. He said: “Clearly, Putin feels that the supplies coming in are extracting a toll and this is becoming a significant factor. The danger here is that Putin continues to escalate up until he reaches a decision point about the use of tactical nuclear weapons to warn the West that any further engagement signals a wider war. It is clearly dangerous, although the Kremlin has not yet said they will target supplies in Nato countries.”
The flow of defensive weapons has been extremely rapid, and US defence officials have said they are “tremendously impressed” by how Ukraine has used them. Mr Biden approved $350million (£268million) in military aid on Feb 26, and three quarters of it arrived within five days. At the time the US indicated speed was of the essence amid the possibility that the shipments could be attacked inside Ukraine, and that it would become ever more difficult to distribute the weapons to Ukrainian forces as Russia took more territory.
Much of the weaponry has been flown from Germany to staging posts in Poland and Romania. Deliveries so far have included 17,000 anti-tank weapons and 900 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles.
In addition, US defence officials are also now looking at sending in Sovietdesigned S-300 anti-aircraft equipment. The S-300s can shoot down planes and cruise missiles and are mobile, allowing the Ukrainians to relocate quickly.
It was unclear where they would come from but three Nato nations have them – Slovakia, Bulgaria and Greece.
The UK, which has already supplied thousands of anti-tank weapons, is looking at providing Starstreak antiaircraft systems to the Ukrainians.
There has been uncertainty in the White House about what Mr Putin will regard as a line for direct involvement, and potentially retaliate against Nato.
Mr Putin has made clear that establishing a no-fly zone would mean that, and Mr Biden this week said US pilots flying US planes into Ukraine would “be World War Three”.
He personally vetoed a plan to send Polish MiG-29s to the Ukrainian air force via a US base in Germany.
Marco Rubio, the most senior Republican on the US Senate intelligence committee, said: “I warned four days ago Putin would soon start targeting supply convoys to Ukraine. Now Russia is openly threatening to do so. I hope Biden is making it clear to Putin that harming a single American soldier would be the worst decision he has ever made.”
Constanze Stelzenmüller, of the Brookings Institution in Washington, said: “Nato still is saying that it will not intervene on Ukrainian territory, but increasingly Western weapons are flowing into Ukraine through Nato member states. It is possible that Putin will, or in fact already sees, such military support... as Nato joining the fight. In other words, the discussion, to some degree, is now about whether Putin would be willing to use tactical nuclear weapons against Nato forces on Nato territory. That would be a new world.”
Dr Julian Lewis, Conservative MP and former defence committee chairman, said: “Nato has carefully calibrated its response to avoid direct military conflict with Russia. The same constraints must apply to Russia, if Putin has any rationality left, in respect of attacking a Nato country that was legitimately supplying defensive weaponry to Ukraine.”
Maj Gen Jonathan Shaw, former director of special forces in the British Army, said: “What exactly is he threatening – to intercept our resupply routes into Ukraine? So where is our instant response that to do so would be to intervene in Western airspace which we will defend with extreme prejudice.”
He added: “We’d better find the courage and resolve to call his bluff or he will end up on the Champs-Elysée.”
Last night the governor of Donetsk, Pavlo Kyrylenko, said the eastern town of Volnovakha had been completely destroyed. Many of the town’s pre-invasion population of 21,000 had fled. “Volnovakha, with its town infrastructure, no longer exists,” he said.
‘The danger here is that Putin continues to escalate up until he reaches a decision point about nuclear weapons’