Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 03:29, 25 December 2024

The term red lines has seen use in the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. It is a veiled threat of engagement intended to warn an opponent or observer not to interfere or undertake an action or behavior that would "cross the red line".

On 21 April 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a speech in which he repeatedly warned the West of red lines that Russia would not accept. The warnings were repeated on many occasions up to the date of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022. In particular, Russia identified Ukraine's possible admission to NATO as a 'red line'. During a December 2021 phone call between U.S. President Joe Biden and President Putin, "Putin told Biden that Ukraine's bid to join NATO must be denied in return for assurances that Russian troops would not carry out an attack." NATO's General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg rejected Russia's demand that it reverse its 2008 pledge to allow Ukraine to join NATO, stating: "NATO's relationship with Ukraine is going to be decided by the 30 NATO allies and Ukraine, no one else."

There has been a vigorous discussion about what Russia means with its red lines. Some have argued that Russia has reacted, but that Russia's reaction has not been as impressive as it had threatened. Others point out that while Russian high command "is unlikely to try to break through Ukrainian defenses by applying nuclear instruments ... Putin did escalate his nuclear rhetoric in the last weeks of his reelection campaign". Some have said that the threat of nuclear war and the number of red lines that have been crossed reveal the inability of belligerents involved in the war to project power internationally.

Russia's red lines

The mention of red lines has been in everyday use since the beginning of the renewed Ukraine conflict to justify the war. In February of 2022, President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation stated that the United States and its Western partners had crossed a red line concerning Ukraine, which resulted in consequence of Russia having to undertake its "Special Military Operation" against Ukraine due to the threat imposed from Ukraine to the very existence of the Russian Federation.

Crossing a red line to the Russian Federation is often identified as damaging Russian national interests. Such actions may include the imposition of sanctions, the freezing of Russian or affiliated nation funds, and the donation of military goods to its perceived adversaries or others.

While the Russian Federation commonly uses the "red line" phrase in international politics, it has simultaneously used it to shape narratives aimed at domestic audiences.

In June 2023, President Putin said that Russia would keep responding to breaches of its red lines. President Putin has been consistent about the threat of nuclear action being used solely in the event of crossing the red line of an existential threat to the state.

In 2023, Russia made 15 official "red line" statements, compared to 24 in 2022.

Usage of red line warnings

Russia has used the phrase "red line" often, and because some of these lines have been crossed without major repercussions, some believe that Russia has devalued the impact of their threats, with the threats appearing more as bluffs.

There may be an actual red line that Russia and the Kremlin have, but it is largely unclear what it consists of.

Some of the red-line threats from Russia may be bluffs solely to slow the supply of resources to Ukraine, making the West consider their options and delaying action.

Others may be used to show that an escalation has occurred once a line is crossed. Red lines are nearly always soft, variable, and adjustable rather than immutable hard-line positions.

Russia and Ukraine have mentioned red lines regarding acceptable peace terms in diplomacy. One such example of a diplomatic Russian red line leaves Russia keeping Crimea, and another Ukrainian red line sees all Russian forces leave the territory that belonged to Ukraine on 31 December 1991. These red lines appear incompatible.

Tacit rules

As time has progressed in the war, a set of implicit rules has emerged which fit between current operations and red lines and affect the rule creator.

Examples of such tacit rules include:

• NATO will defend its territory.
• No NATO forces will operate inside Ukraine against Russian forces.
• NATO will not operate in the airspace over Ukraine to avoid a confrontation.

Under these stated rules, Russia would cross a red line if they attacked a NATO country, and NATO would cross a self-imposed red line if they sent troops into Ukraine. The above aims to limit an expansion of the war; however, it is not all one-sided, as other tacit rules are:

• The US and NATO will share intelligence and satellite imagery with Ukraine.
• NATO countries will provide weapons and ammunition to Ukraine.
• Ukraine will not use NATO weapons to strike inside Russia's pre-2014 borders.

Identified red lines

Russian red lines

  Current red lines

Western red lines

Tactics used to contravene red lines

Red lines come in differing levels of severity. Some of these are bluffs, with parties to the conflict having given many red lines transcended without issue during the last decade. Belligerents and non-belligerents alike have employed several tactics to counter red-line policies. Such counter-measures aim to allow the crossing of red lines with significantly fewer or no consequences.

Noise

The West has often employed a tactic of "noise" before a decision is taken to cross a Russian red line. This noise is often employed in the form of a public debate involving numerous countries, frequently over a month or even longer. Often, these debates involve the possibility of the first weapon being sent from, or via, a third country. Once this has occurred and a few arms have arrived, the red line has effectively been diluted without a significant reaction. Because of the noise surrounding the discussions, no single event can be seen as significant or important enough to be defined as the red-line crossing moment.

Undermining the red line

Another tactic used is supplying something similar to a red line weapon, such as the supply of modern tanks. For example, when France agreed to supply several AMX-10 RC wheeled modern "tanks". These wheeled tanks were not exactly what Ukraine wanted or needed. As a result, it caused a minimal reaction from the Russian Federation while enabling the ability to further dilute the debate of whether it was wheeled vehicles or tracked vehicles that the Russian Federation objected to rather than the fact it was a "modern Western" tank. Following this, Challenger 2 tanks were then promised in addition to modern Leopard 2 and M1 Abrams tanks.

Similar, but not as good

With long-range missiles, the Russian Federation objected to the United States of America supplying ATACMS with a range of 300 km, as Ukraine could use the missiles to attack targets in Russia. In response to this, the United Kingdom supplied its "Storm Shadow" cruise missiles with a range of 250 km. These weapons allowed Ukraine to strike into Russian-held territory in Eastern Ukraine while also having enough range to hit valuable targets within the legal borders of the Russian Federation. This capacity enables Ukraine to destroy command and logistics centers located in occupied Ukraine that Russia had previously moved back out of HIMARS range. The Russian Federation, having a hard-line on the 300 km range, found its red line diluted, and there was no tangible reaction.

Drip feed

A decision to supply a large number of modern tanks would likely provoke an immediate reaction from the Russian Federation; however, when a decision is made for a country to supply a number as small as four tanks, another country may supply seven, and a third country another four. If aid is given in this manner, Russia seems unable to show that a red line has been crossed. By drip-feeding from multiple countries, no one country attracts a significant adverse reaction from what is effectively directly crossing a red line.

Calling the bluff

Belligerents have few options to retaliate meaningfully against other parties for a breach of red-lines without significantly widening the scope of the war or resorting to a nuclear option.

Effect of red lines

Red lines set by Russia have affected NATO member-state decisions concerning Ukraine. For example, the United Kingdom—apart from refusing to have British soldiers participate—has supplied most pieces of equipment and undertaken training missions that they are in a position to do; however, many other countries have shown timidity and concern over the red lines, resulting in a lack of, or delay in, providing assistance to Ukraine.

Certain chemical weapons being deployed by Russia are pushing the boundaries of Western red lines, as is the treatment of civilians, especially Ukrainian children.

Red lines of non-belligerent states

Many countries outside of the direct belligerents active in the Russo-Ukrainian war have interests within it. As a result, foreign parties such as the United Kingdom, the United States, and the People's Republic of China have established their own so-called red lines.

When the international community refers to the crossing of "red lines", it tends to be limited to the use of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons and the supply of other lethal weapons. Below, a small list of such red lines has been provided.

• The United States warned the People's Republic of China not to supply lethal weapons to Russia, or else it would face secondary sanctions.
• Russia warned South Korea that supplying weapons to Ukraine would cross a red line, as Russia would respond by supplying weapons to North Korea.
• The European Council of the European Union implicitly drew a red line when the authorities of Georgia rejected a judicial reform and European Union loan package to reduce the influence of pro-Russia billionaires in the country by offering EU membership candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova (but not Georgia) in June 2022.
• Iran was warned that supplying missiles to Russia would cross a red line resulting in secondary sanctions.
• China has told Russia it would cross a red line by using nuclear weapons in Ukraine, whereby China would stop implicitly supporting Russia in the war.

See also

• List of military aid to Ukraine during the Russo-Ukrainian War
• Timeline of the Russian invasion of Ukraine
• China's final warning, a mocking term for "red lines" that hold no real consequences

References

1. "Any "red lines" left for Putin?". 31 January 2023.
2. Amanda Macias (December 8, 2021). "Biden didn't accept Putin's 'red lines' on Ukraine – here's what that means". CNBC.
3. "NATO chief rejects Russian demand to deny Ukraine entry". Aljazeera. December 10, 2021.
4. DePetris, Daniel (2024-09-26). "The claim that Russia doesn't possess any solid red lines—or won't enforce them—isn't supported by evidence". The Nation. Retrieved 2024-11-21.
5. "Nuclear brinkmanship in Putin's war: Upping the ante". Brookings. Retrieved 2024-11-20.
6. ^ Oleksiy Goncharenko (14 February 2023). "The path to peace in Ukraine runs directly through Putin's red lines". Atlantic Council. Retrieved 2024-11-21.
7. "Russian Attack on Ukraine: Turning-point in the history of Euro-Atlantic Security breaches of its red lines". 3 March 2022.
8. "Putin ponders: Should Russia try to take Kyiv again?". 14 June 2023.
9. Freedman, Lawrence (4 December 2023). "The Russo-Ukrainian War and the Durability of Deterrence". Survival. 65 (6): 7–36. doi:10.1080/00396338.2023.2285598.
10. ^ "ANALYSIS: The Evolution of Russia's 'Red Lines' and Nuclear Threats". 26 October 2023.
11. ^ "Biden shows growing appetite to cross Putin's red lines". The Washington Post. 1 June 2023.
12. ^ "Arming Ukraine without crossing Russia's red lines". 6 April 2023.
13. Gould-Davies, Nigel (1 January 2023). "Putin Has No Red Lines". The New York Times.
14. "Blinken: Crimea a 'red line' for Putin as Ukraine weighs plans to retake it". Politico. 15 February 2023.
15. ""UNTIL WE LIBERATE CRIMEA, WE CANNOT TALK ABOUT LONG-TERM PEACE AND SECURITY FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS." – DENYS SHMYHAL, PRIME MINISTER OF UKRAINE". Retrieved 25 August 2023.
16. "Tacit rules to avoid a NATO-Russia war". 14 March 2022.
17. "Deterrence and defence". 19 July 2023.
18. "NATO has no plans to send troops into Ukraine, Stoltenberg says". Reuters. 24 February 2022.
19. "NATO won't establish no-fly zone over Ukraine, Stoltenberg says". 4 March 2022.
20. "The United States and Allies Sharing Intelligence with Ukraine". 9 May 2022.
21. "U.S., NATO countries announce massive weapons package for Ukraine". NPR. 20 January 2023.
22. "NATO Weapons Must Not Be Used to Attack Russian Territory, Says Scholz". Newsweek. 5 February 2023.
23. "Ukrainian Intelligence Announces Landing Operation in Crimea". Live UA Map.
24. ^ "Russia's "ultimate" red line is as hollow as the first ten". 3 October 2023.
25. ^ "Ukraine: Russia's "red line"". 18 February 2022.
26. ^ "NATO expansion in Ukraine a 'red line' for Putin, Kremlin says". 27 September 2021.
27. ^ "Putin's 'red line' over Ukraine: a new test of European and transatlantic resolve". December 2021.
28. Adams, Paul (12 April 2023). "Ukraine war: Leak shows Western special forces on the ground". BBC. Retrieved 19 March 2024.
29. Sabbagh, Dan; Connolly, Kate (4 Mar 2024). "British soldiers 'on the ground' in Ukraine, says German military leak". The Guardian. Retrieved 19 March 2024.
30. "Who supplies weapons to Ukraine?". Deutsche Welle. 14 February 2022.
31. "NATO Countries Pour Weapons Into Ukraine, Risking Conflict With Russia". 2 March 2022.
32. ^ "Will markets take the strain from the Russia-Ukraine crisis?". 24 February 2022.
33. "Putin says sanctions over Ukraine are like a declaration of war". BBC News. 5 March 2022.
34. "Western arms convoys to Ukraine are 'legitimate targets,' Russia warns". CNBC. 11 March 2022.
35. "Ukraine war: Putin warns against foreign intervention". BBC News. 27 April 2022.
36. "Putin warns United States against supplying Ukraine longer range missiles". Reuters. 5 June 2022.
37. "Russia warns West of weapons repercussions, pounds Ukraine". 2 June 2022.
38. "Shelling kills 21 in Russian city of Belgorod following Moscow's aerial attacks across Ukraine". Associated Press. December 31, 2023. Retrieved 22 March 2024.
39. "Ukrainians Thank North Macedonia For Supply Of Soviet-Era Tanks". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. 6 August 2022.
40. ^ "Biden shows growing appetite to cross Putin's red lines". The Washington Post. 1 June 2023.
41. "Belgorod: Russian paramilitary group vows more incursions". BBC. 25 May 2023. Retrieved 19 March 2024.
42. Smith, Patrick (May 25, 2023). "Pro-Ukraine border raid exposes Russian defenses and divisions". NBC News. Retrieved 19 March 2024.
43. "Putin accuses Ukraine of 'provocation' amid alleged border incursion". BBC. 8 August 2024. Retrieved 21 August 2024.
44. "Russia says longer-range U.S. missiles for Kyiv would cross red line". Reuters. 15 September 2022.
45. ^ "Russian hawks push Putin to escalate as US crosses more 'red lines'". 12 September 2023.
46. "Don't arm Ukraine with Patriot missiles, Ex-Russian president Medvedev warns 'criminal entity' NATO". 29 November 2022.
47. "Russia fumes at West's decision to send tanks to Ukraine, says red lines have been crossed". CNBC. 25 January 2023.
48. "Russia warns West of 'enormous risks' if Ukraine is supplied with F-16 jets". 20 May 2023.
49. Post, Kyiv (2024-06-24). "Ukraine Fires First HIMARS on Russia's Kursk Region, FSB Hit". Kyiv Post. Retrieved 2024-07-07.
50. Murray, Warren; writers, Warren Murray with Guardian (2024-06-04). "Ukraine war briefing: US Himars rockets 'likely' used in Ukrainian attack on Russian soil". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2024-07-07.
51. "Russia warns US not to provide longer-range missiles to Ukraine". 15 September 2023.
52. "Ukraine Fires ATACMS Missile at Russian Forces for the First Time". 17 October 2023.
53. Roth, Andrew (18 October 2023). "Putin calls US supply of ATACMS weapons to Ukraine 'another mistake'". The Guardian.
54. "Ukraine uses US provided missiles in russia for first time". 19 November 2024.
55. @MedvedevRussiaE (November 19, 2024). ""Dmitry Medvedev: NATO missiles fired against our country could be deemed an attack by the bloc on Russia."" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
56. "Putin draws a nuclear red line for the West". Reuters. September 28, 2024.
57. "Ukraine fires US-supplied longer-range missiles into Russia, Moscow says". www.bbc.com. Retrieved 2024-12-25.
58. "Putin approves changes to Russia's nuclear doctrine". www.bbc.com. Retrieved 2024-12-25.
59. "Where does Russia sanctions policy go from here?". 17 March 2022.
60. "Russia-Ukraine crisis: How likely is it to escalate into broader war?". BBC News. 23 February 2022.
61. "Russia's Aggression Towards Ukraine – the German View: A Conversation with Minister of State Tobias Lindner". 10 February 2022.
62. "Ukraine: Nato will respond if Russia uses chemical weapons, warns Biden". BBC News. 25 March 2022.
63. Méheut, Constant; Santora, Marc (2 May 2024). "U.S. Accuses Russia of Using Chemical Weapons in Ukraine". The New York Times.
64. "Imposing New Measures on Russia for its Full-Scale War and Use of Chemical Weapons Against Ukraine". Yes. U.S. Department of State. Office of the Spokesperson. May 1, 2024. Retrieved 29 September 2024.
65. "Arrest warrant may signal the beginning of the end for Putin". 19 March 2023.
66. "Russia risks war with NATO in Black Sea, former top commander in Europe warns". 16 August 2023.
67. "The West must cross more red lines in the Ukraine war, says Lithuanian president". 12 May 2023.
68. "Any "red lines" left for Putin?". 31 January 2023.
69. "Macron promises 'first Western tanks' for Ukraine". 4 January 2023.
70. "UK considering supplying Ukraine with Challenger 2 tanks to fight Russian forces". 9 January 2023.
71. "Britain has delivered long-range 'Storm Shadow' cruise missiles to Ukraine ahead of expected counteroffensive, sources say". 12 May 2023.
72. "Poland delivers first Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine". 24 February 2023.
73. "Media: Spain to deliver first Leopard tanks to Ukraine after Easter". 29 March 2023.
74. "Ambassador: UK to provide twice the promised Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine". 27 July 2023.
75. "Putin Is Running out of Red Lines". Newsweek. 24 May 2023.
76. "Do We Want to Win in Ukraine?". 20 December 2023.
77. "A Russian brigade admits dropping tear gas on Ukrainian troops, which would violate the UN Chemical Weapons Convention". Business Insider. 24 December 2023.
78. "US ambassador to the UN says China would cross 'red line' by providing lethal aid to Russia". 19 February 2023.
79. "Ukraine war: Pressure builds on South Korea to send arms to Kyiv". BBC News. 8 July 2023.
80. "Georgia's future may hinge on Russia's war in Ukraine". 20 March 2023.
81. "ran will cross 'red line' with supplies of missiles to Russia - Kuleba". 5 January 2023.
82. "China drew nuclear red line for Russia in Ukraine". 6 July 2023.

• Russo-Ukrainian War
• Russia–NATO relations
• Russia–United Kingdom relations
• Russia–United States relations
• Russia–European Union relations