“The missiles will speak for themselves” – Volodymyr Zelensky after getting the green light by the US to strike Russia with long-range missiles.
London, 18 November 2024
With US President, Joe Biden, giving the green light for Ukraine to use US missiles with range capable of striking mainland Russia and Russia saying that Biden is throwing “oil on fire”, we shall attempt to interpret these developments and their impact, in global scale.
Written by:
By Angelos Tsigkopoulos
Founder & CEO, Diorasis Group
Publisher, The Decision Maker magazine
Keynote Speaker at The International Negotiations Conference, NegotiCON 2025
A Bold Statement by President Zelensky
In a move that has caught global attention, the United States has permitted Ukraine to utilize long-range missiles against Russia. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s statement, “The missiles will speak for themselves,” highlights the seriousness of the situation and stirs fears about possible escalations, including the terrifying prospect of World War III.
Understanding the West-Russia Dynamic
To understand the current conflict, we need to look at the historical background between the West and Russia. The discord traces back to the ideological clash between Communism and Capitalism during the 20th century, particularly during the Cold War.
The 1917 Bolshevik Revolution led to the rise of the Soviet Union, which positioned itself against Western capitalist ideals. This ideological divide fuelled proxy wars in various regions, including Korea and Vietnam.
After World War II, the U.S. and the USSR emerged as superpowers. Their competition for influence resulted in military build-ups and the establishment of opposing military alliances. For example, NATO was established in 1949 as a collective defence mechanism against potential Soviet aggression.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 opened the door for potential collaboration. However, the West's expansion of NATO eastward contributed to growing distrust in Russia. Over 15 Eastern European countries joined NATO post-1991, further increasing tensions with Moscow.
When Vladimir Putin became president in 1999, he aimed to revive Russia's global presence and made it clear that he wanted Russia to be part of western Europe. In an article in The Guardian, George Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary who led NATO between 1999 and 2003, remembers how Vladimir Putin expressed his interest of joining NATO. Putin publicly suggested that Russia could join NATO, viewing it as an opportunity for cooperation. However, the West's poor approach to such a prospect, widened the gap in relations.
Historical Context of the Current Conflict
The Russia-Ukraine War
The roots of the current Russia-Ukraine conflict date back to 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea, claiming it was necessary to protect Russian-speaking citizens. This invasion ignited widespread international condemnation and led to economic sanctions against Russia. By 2018, more than 100 countries had voiced opposition to the annexation.
The situation intensified in 2022 when Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, arguing it was necessary to safeguard ethnic Russians in the country. Critics worldwide dismissed this justification, viewing it as a façade for territorial ambitions. According to reports, over 7 million Ukrainians have been displaced since the start of the invasion, illustrating the massive humanitarian impact.
The Role of NATO
NATO's involvement is essential to understanding the evolving dynamics. NATO has positioned itself as a defence alliance for its members. However, its eastward expansion has been perceived by Russia as an encroachment into its sphere of influence. This perception fuels Russia’s militaristic rhetoric and actions.
Putin has labelled NATO a significant threat to Russian sovereignty. For instance, in a televised address in June 2024, he emphasized that any perceived threat would prompt a full response, potentially including the use of nuclear weapons. Such declarations amplify fears about escalating conflicts.
The recent approval of long-range missile strikes by Biden has raised the stakes. Russian officials condemned this as “pouring oil on fire,” indicating fears of moving closer to direct confrontation.
The Broader Implications
Are We Closer to World War III?
The escalating rhetoric and mobilization of military resources raise the question: are we closer to World War III? As both NATO and Russia ramp up troop deployment, it seems this possibility is growing. Historical instances, like the Cuban Missile Crisis, remind us that tensions can spiral quickly, posing significant risks to global stability.
The implications for global safety are vast. Potential confrontations between NATO and Russia bring pressing questions regarding defence strategies and international alliances. Millions of lives hang in the balance as conflicts grow.
Impact on Global Financial Markets
Investors face unique challenges amid this geopolitical turmoil. The volatility stemming from the conflict creates uncertainty in asset allocation. Historically, significant international conflicts have pushed investors to seek safe havens like gold or U.S. Treasury bonds. For instance, there was a nearly 20% increase in gold prices immediately following the announcement of long-range missile support for Ukraine.
There are escalating concerns about disruptions to energy markets. Russia is a major natural gas supplier to Europe, and isolating the country could lead to inflated energy costs or supply shortages. In fact, European gas prices surged by 25% in the months following the 2022 invasion.
International investors must reassess strategies in light of these geopolitical risks. Divesting from companies reliant on Russian markets becomes increasingly essential, as sanctions and military tensions can severely impact asset values.
Foreign Direct Investment
The ongoing conflict significantly affects foreign direct investment (FDI) in NATO nations. Uncertainties related to geopolitical risks might make companies think twice before investing in regions perceived as unstable. According to a recent survey, 60% of investors reported heightened concerns about geopolitical tensions impacting their investment decisions.
Additionally, reallocating military spending to strengthen defences may deprive vital sectors such as infrastructure and education of necessary funding.
Navigating a Perilous Landscape
The phrase “The missiles will speak for themselves” captures the fragile state of global relations amid rising U.S.-Russian tensions. As Western nations engage in strategic rivalries with Russia, understanding the historical context is crucial to navigating current challenges.
The Russia-Ukraine war, compounded by NATO's military actions, raises concerns about wider global conflict, investor hesitance, and the looming threat of nuclear engagement. To mitigate risks, both policymakers and investors must approach this situation with caution and foresight, emphasizing stability in an increasingly unpredictable world.
The shadows of historical conflicts loom large, reminding us that the choices we make today will shape the future of international relations.
Comments