“The best weapons for the best soldiers. Then go ahead! With these words, the Minister of Defense of Ukraine Oleksiy Reznikov welcomed the first “fantastic” tanks that arrived in Kyiv from the West. The 14 French light AMX-10-RCs were followed by 18 German-made Leopard 2 heavy tanks and two of the UK’s promised 14 Challenger, escorted by Stryker, Cougar and Marder armored vehicles. The Portuguese, Spaniards and Poles are preparing for their own missions in the coming days.

Once again, psychological warfare precedes military operations. Ukrainian officials’ glorification of their newly acquired weapon systems is clearly intended to boost morale among their soldiers and discourage the enemy ahead of Kiev’s announced spring counteroffensive. It was a winter when, despite fierce Russian attacks on the eastern fronts of Donetsk and Luhansk, the line of contact remained largely stable, and the marginal gains for Russia were wholly out of proportion to the very high cost.

The first respite came at Volendar, where the Russians were forced to retreat, leaving behind dozens of disabled tanks. Their efforts to seize Avdovka under their control near Donetsk, the capital of the region of the same name, have also so far been fruitless. But the biggest test lies in Bahamut, which has been under siege for eight months in the longest and deadliest battle on European soil since World War II. Since the capture of the key city by the Russians would create a strong foothold against the two major cities in the province still controlled by the Ukrainians, Slavyansk and Kramatorsk, both camps threw tens of thousands of soldiers into the fight. In the absence of independent observers, it is difficult to get a reliable picture of which of the two suffered the most damage and how this will affect the further development of the war.

Moscow’s response to the psychological warfare of Kyiv and its allies was that Vladimir Putin laid the nuclear card on the table. The truth is that the Russian president has been pressured by the announcement by the British Ministry of Defense that it intends to equip the Challengers it is sending to Ukraine with highly penetrating depleted uranium missiles, similar to those used by the Americans in Yugoslavia and Iraq.

Earlier that year, the Kremlin warned that if that happened, the Russian military would not hesitate to use depleted uranium as well. However, over the weekend, Putin went even further, announcing that he would deploy tactical battlefield nuclear weapons in Belarus. A few days later, on Wednesday, large-scale military exercises began in Siberia using Yars intercontinental ballistic missiles, which are Russia’s spearhead against the United States.

The Russian president is betting on the nuclear card, putting pressure on the West and Ukraine for an advantageous, from Moscow’s point of view, compromise.

From a practical standpoint, none of these gestures of the Russian display of nuclear might in the least change the Ukrainian or wider European chessboard. Even if Russian short-range missiles are installed in Belarus (since no steps have been taken in this direction so far), it is difficult to see what this will add to the big picture, since Russia has already installed hypersonic missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads to the Russian enclave Kaliningrad, to the Baltic, i.e. at distances of several tens of miles from the borders of Poland or Lithuania. Moscow appears to be counting on only maintaining a climate of nuclear terror to win out a profitable compromise on the Ukrainian side, or at least keep Western aid to Kyiv within certain limits.

Zelensky’s fear

This, apparently, is what Volodymyr Zelensky is afraid of, which is why he is in a hurry for some new tangible successes in the field of operations, since after the capture of Kherson in early November, his forces are constantly on the defensive. On Tuesday, the Ukrainian president stressed that a victory over the Russians in the Battle of Bakhmut is absolutely essential, as if defeated, the will of the West could be twisted and pressure for a ceasefire would be unacceptable to Kiev. territorial concessions. The atmosphere became even more tense on Thursday, when the general staff of the Ukrainian armed forces acknowledged for the first time Russia’s significant progress on the battlefield.

If fatigue is evident in both camps after more than 13 months of war, the same is true in the other war, the war of the economy. Thanks to China’s assistance, ceremonially reaffirmed during Xi Jinping’s recent visit to Moscow, Russia eased the impact of Western sanctions by securing semiconductors and industrial components while at the same time offsetting some of the losses from reduced energy exports to Europe. But Vladimir Putin was forced to admit publicly for the first time last Wednesday that Western sanctions would have a bigger impact over the medium term, and prepared his compatriots for more difficult days.

But even in the camp of the West, endurance begins to dry up. Social unrest in France and waves of targeted strikes in the UK and Germany portend that Euro-Atlantic unity is not a given in the long run, especially in the new environment of international banking instability. Paradoxically, Westerners who kicked Russian banks out of SWIFT now have more reason to worry about their banks than Russians.

Against this background, hostilities, which will escalate in the near future as the terrain becomes more favorable for tank combat, may be decisive for the outcome of the war and the position of each side at the final negotiating table. As the West ramps up its efforts to support Ukraine by gathering valuable air and sea intelligence, the most immediate danger will be open conflict between Russia and NATO, as the interception of the U.S. MQ-9 drone warned us about. two Russian Su-27 fighter jets last month in the Black Sea.