Ukraine’s recent attack on Russia ignored serious international protocols and risks catastrophic escalation, but Trump appears committed to the war, explains Chris Bambery

‘It is now 89 seconds to midnight.’ 

Those are the chilling words of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, founded in 1945 by Albert Einstein, J. Robert Oppenheimer, and University of Chicago scientists who helped develop the first atomic weapons in the Manhattan Project: ‘In setting the Clock one second closer to midnight, the Science and Security Board sends a stark signal: Because the world is already perilously close to the precipice, a move of even a single second should be taken as an indication of extreme danger and an unmistakable warning that every second of delay in reversing course increases the probability of global disaster.’ That was in January this year.

On Sunday, 1 June, Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) launched an operation code-named Spiderweb, targeting four Russian military airfields. More than 100 drones had been brought in trucks, driven by unsuspecting Russian drivers, and these were fired remotely, through retractable roofs.

According to video footage and satellite images, the drones destroyed between ten and thirteen aircraft at sites in Russia’s Irkutsk and Murmansk regions. Ukraine claimed that 41 Russian aircraft had been destroyed. Ukrainian footage was shown by the BBC and others in such a way that you’d believe it was some game teenagers were playing on their phones; the commentary was little better.

Operation Spiderweb was extremely dangerous because what was being targeted were Russia’s strategic cruise-missile and nuclear-weapon carriers. Western media reports were gleeful that they were out in the open, suggesting this was a turkey shoot caused by Russian stupidity. In fact, under the terms of the New Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (START), strategic bombers are meant to be visible and countable via satellite monitoring, and stationed at designated bases, marked for identification.

An article published in Pravda on 2 June pointed out that ‘attacks on nuclear-capable aircraft could undermine the effectiveness of Russia’s nuclear forces’, and ‘According to the “Basic Principles of the State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence”, such actions fall under conditions that may justify the use of nuclear weapons.’ Those are chilling words.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Operation Spiderweb involved eighteen months of planning. It is hard to believe that this could have been done without intelligence and targeting involving the CIA and MI6. Ukraine said they did not inform Washington of the attack but this does not mean the US and UK deep states were not involved previously.

CNN on Monday quoted a senior US defense department official saying: ‘US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth received regular updates as he travelled to Joint Base Andrews on Sunday but has not yet spoken to his Ukrainian counterparts.’ Others have claimed Hegseth watched the attack in real time.

Trump’s policy on Ukraine

Just how serious an attack on Russian nuclear forces this is was underlined by another in Trump’s administration. Keith Kellogg, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, said in a 3 June interview with Fox News that Ukraine had carried out a ‘very bold attack’ on Russian military airfields, and cautioned that the move significantly increases the risk of escalation.

‘The risk levels are going way up,’ he said. ‘What happened this weekend — people have to understand in the national security space, when you attack an opponent’s, part of their national survival system, which is their triad, their nuclear triad, that your risk level goes up because you don’t know what the other side is going to do, you’re not sure. And that’s what they actually did.’ He continued, ‘When you do that, it’s very clear the risk levels would go up. And I think that’s what we’re trying to avoid.’ Kellogg added that the Ukrainian operation showed the country ‘is not lying down on this’ and that it could raise the risk level to something ‘unacceptable’ for Russia.

What makes this warning extraordinary is that Kellogg is a neocon hawk who has been loud in his support for Ukraine. That he is today Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia is widely seen as Washington giving up on attempts to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine.

That he can see this attack could escalate matters dangerously speaks volumes. Russian President Putin’s trust in the US is paper-thin, and Moscow loathes Sir Keir Starmer, seeing him as a warmonger. If any evidence of US or UK involvement in this attack comes to light, then that would be seen as a serious breach in protocol. Russia formally pulled out of the New START treaty following its invasion of Ukraine because it was not prepared to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities, as required under the treaty, but it has continued to follow other requirements. Meanwhile, a question which needs to be asked of Starmer, is: what was the involvement of MI6 in Operation Spiderweb?

The day after the attack, Russia and Ukraine met in Istanbul for peace talks. The Ukrainian side commenced by saying they had the right to join NATO whenever they wished. Their terms included this: ‘Ukraine is not forced to be neutral. It can choose to be part of the Euro-Atlantic community and move towards EU membership. Ukraine’s membership in NATO depends on consensus within the Alliance. No restrictions may be imposed on the number, deployment, or other parameters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as on the deployment of troops of friendly foreign states on the territory of Ukraine.’

Zelensky knows Russia will not accept Ukraine joining NATO. That has been stated repeatedly. Imagine if Russian troops were stationed in Mexico, and the response that would follow from Washington. The talks ended that day.

The obvious question is why would Russia accept any such provision when it is winning the war and can wait. Ukraine cannot wait. It’s running out of troops and much else. If Trump pulled the plug on US finance and weaponry, it would be over very quickly (Germany, the UK, France and Poland cannot take over that role, and public opinion is against it).

Meanwhile, Trump is not pulling the plug, and this is now his war as much as Biden’s. The fact he’s handed the issue to Kellogg and Secretary of State Marco Rubbio, another neocon, suggests he will let it drag on. The cost will be in Ukrainian and Russian lives.