December 2024

DE-ESCALATION THROUGH DIPLOMACY

De-escalation through diplomacy

In the wake of Russia’s Nov. 21 IRBM strike against Ukraine, Tanya Vatsa assesses the wider global impact of the conflict, and how mediation may hold the only key to ending it

The Russia-Ukraine war, now in its extended phase, is no longer a localised confrontation but a geopolitical vortex pulling in global actors and reshaping international power dynamics. Recent developments – such as Russia’s deployment of intermediate-range ballistic missiles, Ukrainian retaliatory strikes, and the involvement of North Korean troops and Chinese technological support – have added complexity and heightened the stakes. These elements are further compounded by acts of sabotage, damage to critical infrastructure, disruption to civilian lives and hints at covert operational tactics.

On November 21, 2024, Moscow used its advanced Oreshnik intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM) in Dnipro, Ukraine, targeting military infrastructure but also causing collateral damage in civilian areas. The missile, capable of carrying nuclear warheads, demonstrated both Russia’s operational prowess and its willingness to escalate.

Ukrainian forces responded with Western-supplied long-range missiles, striking strategic locations within Russia. Kyiv launched Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) from the US, Storm Shadow from the UK and the French SCALP EG on Russian territory, though the range of these missiles was less than that of Oreshnik. The intermediate range missile is allegedly a variant of the Inter Continental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) RS-26 Rubezh.

Russian forces fighting in Ukraine
The Russia-Ukraine conflict has evolved into a multifaceted crisis with far-reaching implications

The tit-for-tat nature of these strikes underscores the absence of diplomatic detente and the ongoing concentration of force on both sides.

The use of intermediate range missiles also takes one back to the Cold War era Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) between The US and the erstwhile Soviet Union. That treaty was particularly aimed at controlling small to intermediate range missiles (500 to 5,500 kms), given their nuclear capability and their ability to be used with minimal warning.

During his last term as President, Donald Trump rescinded the treaty, following speculation that Moscow had violated it. America’s withdrawal rendered the treaty ineffective, ending a pertinent arms control agreement between the world’s two biggest arsenals. Whether the existence of such a treaty could have deterred Moscow from using the IRBM remains uncertain.

The alignment of Russia and China reflects a disturbing recalibration of the global order

The conflict in Ukraine has evolved into a testing ground for unconventional alliances. Reports of 10,000 North Korean troops in Russia near the Ukrainian border mark a significant escalation. What began as training deployments has shifted into direct combat involvement, aligning Pyongyang closer to Moscow’s strategic objectives. Similarly, China’s provision of nearly 90 per cent of semiconductors used in Russian military equipment, as well as optics and engines for UAVs and cruise missiles, has given Russia a critical lifeline to sustain its military operations amidst sanctions.

North Korea's troop deployments symbolise a new era of ‘proxy personnel’ warfare

The joint naval exercise Ocean-24 between Russia and China in the East China Sea showcased the growing military synergy between the two nations. This drill, involving advanced warships and submarines, highlighted their shared interest in countering Western dominance and securing strategic waterways.

The alignment of these actors reflects a disturbing recalibration of the global order. The use of cutting-edge ballistic technology serves not only as a tactical manoeuvre but also as a psychological signal to the global community about Russia’s resilience against sanctions and external pressures. Coupled with the overt and covert alliances, this seems to be replicating the bipolarisation of the Cold War era, which, instead of creating a military deterrence, is more likely to act as a catalyst for a broader conflict. The direct use of American, British and French missiles on Russian territory is a marked escalation of the aggression, exacerbating the chances of polarised factionalism which is often a precursor to a full-blown war.

Aftermath of Russia’s Nov. 21 Oreshnik strikes on Dnipro
Aftermath of Russia’s Nov. 21 Oreshnik strikes on Dnipro

As for North Korea’s troop deployments, they symbolise a new era of ‘proxy personnel’ warfare, while China’s tech support signals a readiness to challenge Western economic and military dominance covertly. The involvement of global proxies poses a challenge to the emerging multipolarity which is critical to the interconnected economic and socio-political development of most stakeholders. A war in the heart of Eurasia has the potential to destabilise or even reverse the economic and financial gains of the past decade for all important global players.

The recent sabotage of two Baltic Sea undersea fiber-optic cables, connecting Finland to Germany and Lithuania to Sweden, disrupted critical communications infrastructure. While no direct attribution has been made, suspicions of Russian involvement persist, given its history of hybrid warfare tactics. The IRBM attack by Russia was allegedly a retaliatory move against Kyiv’s series of drone attacks on military establishments and air bases, crippling facilities storing anti-tank weapons and fuel. Russia’s drone attack on Ternopil in Ukraine has disrupted power lines and communication services, impacting critical infrastructure and threatening electronic warfare. The impact on the availability of energy and power can spiral into critically crippling situations globally, bringing economies to a halt.

These are some instances which highlight the vulnerability of modern infrastructure in wartime. The economic impact is considerable, affecting trade, data transmission, and trust in regional stability. Combined with the prolonged war, these incidents heighten global economic uncertainties, already strained by sanctions and disrupted energy supplies. These recurring non-military targets are emblematic of modern warfare’s evolution, where information and connectivity are as pivotal as physical battlegrounds.

The Russia-Ukraine conflict has evolved into a multifaceted crisis with far-reaching implications. The deepening involvement of North Korea and China, coupled with acts of sabotage and technological warfare, underscores the fragility of the current global order. While the immediate prospects of a world war remain low, the persistent escalation and absence of constructive diplomacy portend a prolonged and destabilising conflict.

Addressing these challenges requires renewed international efforts to mediate, mitigate, and prevent further erosion of global stability. De-escalation through diplomacy seems the only way forward, given that deterrence as a means to that end has only resulted in normalisation of violence and an unchecked proliferation of arms and weapons.

Tanya Vatsa is currently the Geopolitical and Predictive Intelligence specialist at Inquest Advisories in India, as well as Editor at the Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs, Dept of Defence, United States of America. She completed her Master’s in Legal Studies at the University of Edinburgh after obtaining a law degree from Lucknow’s National Law University, India.