 For more videos on people's struggles, please subscribe to our YouTube channel. Tensions continue over the Russia-Ukraine border as we enter into the year 2022. There have been warnings of war and conflict from both sides, and it is important to understand why has this region become a flashpoint. Russia has mentioned its red lines with NATO's eastward expansion towards Russia. Newsclick's editor, Prabir Purkayashta puts the flashpoint between these two countries and NATO in perspective. The two things which are combined to produce what we are calling the flashpoint Ukraine. Ukraine represents both of these, the fact that it is going to be a part of NATO, and the fact that if Russia does not prevent NATO marching to Ukraine borders and possibly positioning nuclear missiles on its borders, then Russia will be under the nuclear missile threat of NATO. And this is something Putin has said he is not going to accept. This is Russia's existence and therefore he is not going to accept this. Now if you go back a long way, you will realize this is exactly what the United States said when Soviet Union then in 1962 had put missiles on Cuba's borders. Of course, you can talk about this was in response to what the United States has done, putting missiles in Turkey, in other places, but leaving all of that out, Russia's response at the time was we will not allow nuclear missiles so close to our borders and therefore this is a flashpoint. Today what Russia is saying is almost virtually repeat of what was said at that time, that Cuba, if that was a flashpoint, Ukraine is now their flashpoint and the reasons are identical, putting nuclear missiles on its border, threatening it with missiles, missile strikes and here we have to go back to what was the other issue which is that the US has also withdrawn from the intermediate missiles, what is called the intermediate nuclear missile treaty which limited the range of missiles that could be used, which could be positioned and therefore that range is the range which is crucial here because it is not short range, it is middle range and if Ukraine borders are used, as also earlier Romania's as well as Poland's borders have been used or territory has been used, Baltics is where also missiles have been put but not these range of missiles, then yes there is much greater threat to Russia, a possibility of a first strike and taking out the second strike, retaliatory strikes with anti-missile batteries, the batteries which are already being positioned in Poland and Romania, if similar batteries are put in Ukraine then surely it's a threat perception which becomes much more for Russia and that's what the reaction we are seeing. Let's take a deeper dive and look at the history of NATO's eastward expansion and also put the lens on why Russia has raised the issue of the missile batteries on Russia's borders in the Baltics, Poland and Romania. How are these linked to the US withdrawal from the intermediate ballistic missile treaty? What is the difference when NATO troops and missiles are in Poland and Romania and when they come up to Ukraine? The red line drawn by Russian President Volodymyr Putin needs to be understood in this particular context. If we look at the NATO expansion after really the fall of Soviet Union which was 1990-91, at that time Soviet Union was dissolved and essentially Russia became the state which inherited the treaties, the nuclear treaties, other treaties which Soviet Union had signed and at that time there were various promises made, promises made to Soviet Union when Gorbachev was the leader which was followed up to promises made to Yeltsin as the President of Russia. All these promises were that NATO would not march east, in fact what James Baker had told Gorbachev, not one inch beyond Germany's current borders. Now that is the promise which were reiterated by all Western leaders. Now documentary evidence is available, that is the security archives which documents all of this, files various freedom of information act requests and they have documented a lot of these assurances which were given which were steadily not observed. We saw marches of NATO eastwards not once but twice thrice and the latest expansion is Ukraine is also Georgia. Both these expansions are on the offing and there is also talk about Finland as well as Sweden. Both of them are not NATO members also being brought within NATO. So this is the background by which NATO which was supposed to be not Atlantic Treaty which brings the United States to Western Europe. That was the purpose getting Western Europe under essentially the US umbrella so to say but if you remember the Intermediate Range Bezile issue that was something Western Europe was much more concerned about because they felt that any war between the United States and Soviet Union will be fought in Western Europe. So Western Europe will be the one which will therefore come under the Intermediate Range Beziles fired by Russia by Soviet Union and therefore they had a big stake in the Intermediate Range Beziles being actually banned not being used and that's why it was a land-based treaty it was not a sea-based treaty. Sea-based Intermediate Range Beziles were accepted but land-based missiles were not. Essentially it was in the interest of Western Europe and other European countries not to have nuclear weapons play in European heartland. That was the whole issue but once NATO prevailed shall we say in their view they are the one who won the Cold War though the reasons of that are different we will not go into that today why Soviet Union imploded when it did the reality of it is this is what led again to the revival of the talk that Intermediate Range Beziles can now be positioned and can target Russia and this is the reason why Trump raised the issue of Russian missiles which were a violation of the Intermediate Range Bezile Treaty Intermediate Nuclear Treaty INF Treaty but instead of raising it in the fora which is the treaty itself there are dispute resolution mechanisms he decided to walk out of it and why he walked out of it becomes clear when you look at the actual missiles that would be talked of Russia they claimed was violating it because they're using something called they called SSC-8 missiles which are basically a combination of a land or a sea-based missile the US actually has exactly identical missile they introduced it first basically missiles which can house both cruise missiles which are offensive missiles as well as defensive missiles which are essentially missiles are anti-missiles they shoot down opposing missiles which come but the battery that fires it what is called the Aegis batteries they are essentially ones which can house both missiles and they do it's just a container and which missile is fired depends on what is inside the container so effectively that Aegis battery can house and this is originally something which was sea-based can house either cruise missiles all it can house also anti-missiles at which missile is a choice that the country makes which puts a battery now that missile was converted to a land-based missile and is the one which has been positioned in Poland and in Romania these are the two places that these missiles were shifted and Russia at that time itself said that this are essentially offensive weapons and they also can fire cruise missiles so this is also this a violation of the INF Treaty but that is the whole issue it is to position these missiles that it appears now that Trump wanted to walk out of the INF Treaty and this is something which it's interesting which Biden has also continued so the question of what happens in Ukraine is linked to the intermediate range missiles the INF Treaty the US walking out of it and now installing these missiles in Eastern Europe now my only question is this is what Western Europe actually protested earlier they're very unhappy but this is happening now that the eastward march of NATO is taking place they possibly feel we are not likely to be hit we are far away it's Eastern Europe which will now suffer the consequence of any war over here so why the hell should we bother but of course as we know European landmass particularly Western Europe and Central Europe is not that far therefore any range of nuclear exchange over there is going to use you know effect everybody and let's face it if nuclear exchange takes place in Europe it's going to probably mean the end of not only European civilization but possibly all global civilization because it's been calculated just a few nuclear explosions around the world of this kind will probably mean the end of the climate change that we talk about it will mean possibly the end of a whole range of human activities and it's doubtful that the human civilization would survive it but let's face it it's Western Europe and Eastern Europe where this major battle is going to be fought so I'm surprised that in order to threaten Russia which is what they're planning to do why are the risking their own territories for this is a question that I really have no answer for it's a question we need to ask the European leadership what are the possibilities in the standoff between Russia Ukraine and NATO can this region risk a full blown war none of the talks between American President Joe Biden and Russian President Volodymyr Putin seems to have de-escalated the current situation is there a likelihood of Russia invading Ukraine will Russia budge from its red lines will the US and the leading European powers in NATO accept that Russia has legitimate security concerns about NATO's eastwards march if not a war will be fought on the European theater on both sides countries have nuclear weapons and this makes it for far more dangerous than any other war that we have seen in recent times let's unpack this in the last segment you know the issue really is whether now what Biden has said that is willing to discuss these issues and if he discusses these issues it's not a discussion between only United States and Russia just Biden and Putin or their as a what would be called their negotiators but would also mean NATO collectively discussing these issues and I do think that the fact that Biden has said after all of these noises that Putin has made that yes we are going to discuss we'll start the process of discussion maybe maybe there is some rethinking that this is not the best way to go that their threat is very simple the US has made this threat time and again that if Russia threatens Ukraine enters military Ukraine it's most possible that NATO will not be able to prevent it Russia is much too militarily powerful so they would then do what is called the economic the financial nuclear option which is throw Russia out of the financial system of the world which the US has the ability to do because dollar is the basically the financial currency in which all transactions takes place and they control those transactions to what's called the swift system but that is really a economically what would be called a nuclear option so therefore I doubt very much that they want to go that far and if they do European Union would suffer significantly because then the gas that they rely on particularly in winter comes from Russia so the economic ties between Russia and Europe if they are sundered if they are separated like this that's huge consequences for Europe itself so hopefully better sense will prevail on Europe and better sense will prevail on Biden to at least come to an agreement that what they will do with NATO what they will do with Ukraine will be limited earlier they had this Georgia when they actually supported Georgia in a way that led to Georgia trying to enter two autonomous regions at that time which had not declared independence but was still outside the control of the Georgian settled government and that led to a limited war with Russia and Georgia actually lost and obviously NATO couldn't come in over there because Georgia is rather far away and it's a very small country Ukraine also similarly has much less capacity to stand up to Russia so will the NATO fight a war on Ukraine not likely will it lead to a war that takes place by accident it is possible but I think better sense will prevail these are all noises being made and finally maybe both sides when they come to the negotiating table will take a much more sober posture and hope that we can resolve this issue peacefully and we don't see 2022 start with the near war