November 15, 2024

`; document.write(write_html); }
Minsk’s signals and statements notwithstanding, on October 20, the Ukrainian General Staff of the Armed Forces stated that the threat of an invasion in the north was on the rise (YouTube, October 20). The General Staff’s representative specified that such a hypothetical invasion might target the western regions of Ukraine, aiming to break the flow of arms supplies coming from Poland. However, just four days later, the chief of Ukrainian Defense Intelligence, Major General Kyrylo Budanov, questioned such assessments, adding that he had not observed any indications of preparations for an offensive in Belarus and, therefore, considered such a development improbable in the coming months (Hromadske, October 24). He added that it would take Russia about two weeks to deploy the adequate number of troops to Belarus needed for an offensive—and this would not go unnoticed.
Besides the considerations outlined by Budanov, another factor appears to support the notion that Minsk has zero plans to attack Ukraine from Belarusian territory—that is, the severe lack of appropriate military, medical and engineering infrastructure on the Belarusian side (Minsk Dialogue, November 3). Unlike the case on Russia’s border with Ukraine on the eve of Moscow’s invasion, Belarus is doing nothing to actively prepare such infrastructure. On the contrary, as the Ukrainian Defense Ministry reported in the summer, Belarus has laid explosive mines in forests, roads and bridges close to the Ukrainian border, which can hardy signal intensions to launch an offensive (Kmu.gov.ua, June 2).
Thus, the RGF’s deployment and the fact that Minsk initiated it do seem to reflect the Belarusian leadership’s perceptions of threats and vulnerabilities. Furthermore, these developments evidently amount to Minsk doubling down on the “hypothetical NATO attack” narrative it is spewing to preempt pressures from war-mongering circles in Russia who are clamoring for Belarus’s direct involvement in the war (see EDM, September 27).

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT
By the Jamestown Foundation
More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:
Back to homepage
Previous Post
Russia Moves To Counter Western Sanctions With New Transit Route
Next Post
Europe Moves To Capitalize On Russia’s Waning Influence In Central Asia
Founded in 1984, The Jamestown Foundation is an independent, non-partisan research institution dedicated to providing timely information concerning critical political and strategic developments in China,…
The Oil Market Has Shifted Into A New Cycle
How Chinese Military Equipment Found Its Way Into The Ukraine War
Saudi Arabia Suckered Again By Russia In OPEC+’ s Output Cut
Tesla’s New Charging Standard Makes Competition Near-Impossible
The Prospect Of Weaponizing Oil Against China
ADVERTISEMENT

© OilPrice.com
The materials provided on this Web site are for informational and educational purposes only and are not intended to provide tax, legal, or investment advice.
Nothing contained on the Web site shall be considered a recommendation, solicitation, or offer to buy or sell a security to any person in any jurisdiction.
Trading and investing carries a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. Individuals should consider whether they can afford the risks associated to trading.
74-89% of retail investor accounts lose money. Any trading and execution of orders mentioned on this website is carried out by and through OPCMarkets.
Merchant of Record: A Media Solutions trading as Oilprice.com

source

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *