
Putting NATO troops into direct contact with the Russian army would be a foolish step that could lead to "global catastrophe," Russian President Vladimir Putin warned on Friday, following the Central Asia-Russia summit in Astana, Kazakhstan.
Asked whether NATO might send troops into Ukraine if the country was close to defeat in its conflict with Russia, Putin said this would be a "dangerous step that could lead to a global catastrophe."
"I hope that those who speak about this will have enough intelligence to prevent such a dangerous step from happening," he said.
The Russian leader also said it was necessary to understand what one means by the word "defeat" in the context of the Ukraine crisis.
"Everyone can understand this differently," he said, explaining that some may already see the fact that Crimea voted to become part of Russia in 2014 as a defeat for Ukraine. "We need to understand what is meant [by defeat]," he added.
The West has funneled tens of billions of dollars in financial and military assistance to Ukraine since the conflict began in February, with the US in particular vowing to back Kiev for "as long as it takes" to defeat Moscow's troops.
At the same time, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has repeatedly said that the US-led bloc is "not a party to the conflict" in Ukraine. He admitted this week, however, that a Russian victory would be regarded as a "defeat" for the whole Western alliance and acknowledged that NATO had been providing "unprecedented support" to Kiev to avoid such a scenario.
Stoltenberg's comments amounted to "an open confirmation of NATO's participation in the war," former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Wednesday.
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky again this week demanded tens of billions of dollars from the IMF and the World Bank and pleaded with the West for the delivery of more anti-aircraft weapons to continue its fight against Russia.
Moscow has long warned the West against sending arms to Kiev, saying it will only prolong the fighting and increase the risk of direct confrontation between Russia and NATO.



Reader Comments
After that they can further shame the US at the UN at least.
Perhaps that exact fact & force of embarrassment would expose the whole picture with bigger optics & be too much for the cabal to bear publicly. Propaganda publicity has been a legit tour de force - Force Majeure for them.
What you posit is certainly plausible. I suspect has happened in the prisoner exchanges under the radar. I have seen no reports as of yet claiming NATO-Nazi prisoners. I suspect it’s mostly been FUD/FEARN Porn up until Putin launched his real attacks @ AFU C4ISR & critical infrastructure. Notice Zelensky has suddenly become quiet. I’d pop smoke, cut sling & offer the PEACE pipe before he gets AMF’d.
Shipping Mercs of Terror from Syria or Israel AO’s to Ukraine wasn’t the best move either.
France takes Algeria from Turkey, and almost every year England annexes another Indian principality: none of this disturbs the balance of power; but when Russia occupies Moldavia and Wallachia, albeit only temporarily, that disturbs the balance of power. France occupies Rome and stays there several years during peacetime: that is nothing; but Russia only thinks of occupying Constantinople, and the peace of Europe is threatened. The English declare war on the Chinese, who have, it seems, offended them: no one has the right to intervene; but Russia is obliged to ask Europe for permission if it quarrels with its neighbour. England threatens Greece to support the false claims of a miserable Jew and burns its fleet: that is a lawful action; but Russia demands a treaty to protect millions of Christians, and that is deemed to strengthen its position in the East at the expense of the balance of power. We can expect nothing from the West but blind hatred and malice.... (comment in the margin by Nicholas I: 'This is the whole point')
Mikhail Pogodin's memorandum to Nicholas I, 1853