Apparently, one supposed Russian strategy is to surround Kyiv and besiege the city of 2+ million people. By starving them out they can force a surrender quicker than bombing them to oblivion, which as we know will take a while.
Assuming that happens and Ukraine can’t break through the siege, what stops NATO from doing an airdrop of humanitarian supplies. I don’t think that alone would trigger WWIII, but I’m not sure if NATO planes would be able to get past the Russian line surrounding the city without being shot down.
Assuming an airdrop was planned at night, and a NATO plane carrying food, water, and medical supplies was shot down by Russians, killing the pilots, would that be equivalent to Russia attacking a NATO country?
Is Russia currently obstructing or denying humanitarian aid to Ukrainian civilians? That would be a violation of the Geneva Conventions in and of itself. NATO shouldn’t need to resort to sneakery to deliver medicine and food.
I’m not aware of a humanitarian crisis in Kyiv at this point since the hospitals are open and well supplied and there is ample food in shops whenever the curfew is lifted. I believe supplies are moving into the capital at least to a certain degree.
Once Kyiv is completed surrounded it’s only a matter of time before their food gets rationed and medical supplies run low. At that point, things may get desperate and the EU or NATO may try to get food and medical supplies into Kyiv despite the Russians. Hence the question.
If Russia surrounds Kyiv, and denies food or medical supplies to the inhabitants, that is a war crime.
It is against all international law.
Sure, it was done during WWII. This does not mean that it would work today.
Why not? Modern communications. Images of starving civilians being broadcast around the world would disgust every country even more than at present. Images and stories of hospitals with no medicine.
I believe that well before it got to this point, even China would have had enough, and Russia would be completely closed off from all commerce, all imports, all exports and there would be massing of military on every border. They would be given the choice of leaving Ukraine or ceasing to exist as a country. As an added condition, I imagine Putin would be expected to be sent for trial at the Hague.
Right, that’s what I was getting at. At the point where NATO is thinking about defying the Russian military to do daring nighttime supply drops, we’re at a whole new level of problematic.
Put all Russian businesses in the west (particularly in Britain) into third party hands temporarily.
Tell the oligarchs that their residences are now required to house Ukraine refugees; they may go stay at a hotel or something.
They can get their businesses and their residences back as soon as the Russian army is out of Ukraine and Putin is in the hands of the International Court in the Hague for war crimes. These people have a great deal of influence in Russia. Make this their problem. Let them figure out how to fix it.
They want things to go back to normal? It’s not that hard. Eliminate one man.
In fact, it would be better to send food by ground through the Russian lines. Let the troops inspecting the deliveries see how much better the people in Kyiv are eating than they are.
my guess: if they’d really start starving civilians in Kiev, there would be a UN-mandate, enforced by a broad alliance relying (mostly, but not exclusively) on NATO equipment. For sure a no-fly zone and everything russian flying in this zone would be converted into vapor.
Help would be airlifted into Kiev, just like into Berlin after the war, and those big transporters will be secured by F15/16/18/22/35 and a lot of patriots and other sophisticated weaponry easily surpressing anything the russians could do …
Essentially an “Earth against Russia” scenario … we have gone too far (especially Europe) and there is no turning back now …
In the middle or longer term .ru will run out of $$$, soldiers will not get paid, they will deflect in huge numbers, Putin will get suddenly sick, and get a good funeral service.
Putin has no intention of engaging in a weeks or months long seige to try to starve the city into surrender. He needs this war over quickly. If the Russian Army takes a pause it’s only so they can bring up more troops and weapons to batter the city into surrender.
But his is not a Berlin air-lift situation by any strech of the imagination. People do not starve in a week, and whatever the fate of Kyiv it will be decided in a week or less. One way or the other. I hope for the best, but I cannot claim to know.
I think this is exactly the reasons the Ukrains are stalling this ridiculous convoy (rather than engaging) … they are wearing them down (by the book), the convoy will eventually run out of gas or food (bear in mind those soldiers have not showered in weeks or seen a toilet, and are sleeping un sub-zero temps unless they keep the engine running - which guzzles more gas…)
… at this stage, time is on Ukr.'s side, as there seems to be a lot of european weapons pouring in and they just need to get them into place …
this must be really demoralizing for everyone on this convoy … sitting like a duck, knowing they are being observed, knowing they will be engaged, being confronted with breakdowns, trucks stranded without gas that need to be refilled, knowing you get weaker by the hour and the enemy stronger by the hour … that will wear them down emotionally …
that convoy is probably currently one of the darkest places to be on this planet
It was not a war crime until the parties ratified Additional Protocol I (article 54) to the Geneva Convention of 1949, which was only proposed in 1977. The Soviet Union ratified in 1989, Ukraine in 1990.
As an aside, the United States has not ratified this protocol of the Geneva Conventions and thus is not strictly subject to the prohibition against using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare.
If Kyiv were indeed besieged as you posit, then NATO wouldn’t be able to do an airdrop without neutralizing Russian SAMs first. It would take an extensive SEAD campaign; warplanes like F-35s would have to hit most or all of the Russian SAMs in the vicinity and also sweep the skies of opposing Russian aircraft in order to keep the transports safe. And even then, a city of 2 million people needs a LOT of food. It would have to be 24/7 flights nonstop by C-17s.
And no, if a NATO transport were shot down over Kyiv, it would not trigger Article 5 since it didn’t happen on NATO soil.
of course, Poutine has the ultimate trump card of starting a nuclear war. Vlad isn’t going to retire somewhere. He either drops dead from natural causes, gets a bullet in the back of the head, or goes out in a global nuclear cloud.
