IMO, this article is interesting on a number of fronts: (a) it broaches the thorny issue of Provocation (b) It highlights Tactical Nukes which are not included in the SALT limitation agreements and that both the Russia and the US are assumed to have at least 2000 such weapons each. (c) It highlights the encampment of significant numbers of NATO troops close to the Russian border(including 12000 US troops)
So why is a US led peace negotiations necessary? IMO it reverts to the Cold War (and the circumstances still exist) that a first strike Nuke War is unwinnable because it would ensure MAD( Mutually Assured Destruction) due to the other side's ability to early detect and massively respond.....hence MAD.
Russia has intimated that it will use Nukes (at first likely Tactical Nukes) to defend its territory which presumably means mainland Russia and possibly the Crimea because of the importance of Sevastopol. as Russia's most important Naval Port.
This is why the US has limited the range of shells and missiles supplied to the Ukraine , but the big question is will that remain? Strikes by the Ukraine within Russia indicates that the US resolve to limit Nato's weapons range is softening.
This is why, IMO, that a US led truce/peace negotiations will happen sooner rather than later; otherwise the wishful thinking of a winnable war by both sides could lead to WW3 with dire consequences for humanity and, IMO, the Ukraine is not worth that unthinkable risk for either Russia or NATO.
