SNOTRA DELUX

Joe Biden cautioned Russia about the repercussions of aggression during pre-war talks between the US and Russia, but clearly ruled out the prospect of the US using military action. The call for a military reaction from Nato is becoming stronger as Ukrainian citizens are being attacked and refugees flow into other central European nations.

Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky, has announced that the skies must be closed above the country, while a Ukrainian journalist addressed UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson at a press conference, crying out for western backing to establish a no-fly zone over Ukraine, which Johnson flatly refused.

The apparent reason for the Ukrainians' desire for a no-fly zone is that it would restrict Russia's ability to unleash attacks on Ukrainian cities. Despite the knowledge that a no-fly zone would not prohibit Russia from firing missiles against targets in Ukraine, this is what Russia is doing. Ben Wallace, the British defense minister, also advocated against a no-fly zone, claiming that it would hinder Ukrainian jets from attacking Russian soldiers on the ground.

The tactical grounds for a no-fly zone are unpersuasive. Because it is enforced by aircraft that continually monitor the sky, a no-fly zone does not imply that no aircraft are allowed to fly. Only if Ukrainian aircraft are outfitted with Nato "friend-or-foe identification" could a no-fly zone be imposed on hostile planes, which would prevent Russian assault helicopters from helping ground troops.

The Ukrainian air force would be able to strike Russian convoys reaching key cities. The feared dangers of escalation are the most basic reason why the US and other Nato governments are firmly opposed to any direct military operations in Ukraine.

Indeed, Vladimir Putin has previously threatened to deploy nuclear weapons in retaliation for economic and political sanctions on Russia. Western authorities have so far disregarded these warnings because they do not believe they are genuine.

However, Russia's massive nuclear weapons and the threat of a larger conflict effectively dissuade Nato members from participating militarily in any way other than delivering equipment. Deterrence with nuclear weapons is effective. It is discouraging Nato because western officials are dubious of Russia's leadership's logic.

Ukraine vs. Russia

The Russian air force, without a doubt, has significantly more assets and capabilities than the Ukrainian air force. Many people are surprised that Russia has yet to gain air supremacy, and Ukraine's airspace is still disputed. The Russian air force continues to offer a severe and rising danger to Ukraine, despite the fact that anti-aircraft missiles still pose a substantial threat to Russian aircraft and Ukrainian air force fighters can still undertake low-level, defensive counter-air and ground-attack operations.

THE BATTLE FOR THE SKY HAS BEGUN

The Russian air force has stationed over 300 sophisticated military aircraft in Ukraine's conflict zones, although they haven't conducted many missions yet. The tactical reasons are unknown, though a commentary from the Royal United Services Institute suggests that a lack of precision-guided munitions, the difficulties of deconflicting, or avoiding friendly fire from ground-based Russian anti-air missiles, and Russian pilots' lack of flight experience could all be factors.

NATO vs. Russia

There's no denying that Nato planes might combat Russian planes. If Russia chose to escalate, establishing air supremacy will require extremely intensive military confrontations. The F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning, both fifth-generation US combat aircraft, are a generation ahead of Russia's most sophisticated aircraft, the SU-57. It's also worth noting that the majority of Russian planes deployed are expected to be the less sophisticated SU-30 and SU-35.

The air strength of NATO is capable of defeating Russian aircraft.

NATO has the necessary capabilities to conduct operations in Ukraine. According to a Nato statement, the alliance has "deployed hundreds of extra defensive land and air troops in the eastern portion of the Alliance, as well as marine assets throughout the Nato territory," and its defense plans have been activated. This implies that more aircraft are already patrolling east European skies, including British fighters based at RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire and RAF Akrotiri.

Possibilities of escalation

In addition to engaging and destroying Russian aircraft, enforcing a no-fly zone would need attacks against Russian air defense systems stationed within Ukraine, which would also target Russian ground troops. Because the Russian air force is stationed outside of Ukraine, it would have to be beaten on a regular basis in order to retain air dominance. Strikes against Russian and Belarusian territory will be required to defeat air defenses.

In retaliation, Russian air attacks against Nato air defense assets in Central and South-Eastern Europe are a possibility. In reality, Ukraine has already bombed a Russian airfield outside of the country, and similar assaults would be a crucial component of any campaign to impose a no-fly zone. It's nearly certain that the armed war will spiral out of control.

It is critical to recognize that a no-fly zone over Ukraine is not the same as previous wars, such as those in Iraq and Syria. For the time being, Nato members are determined that such a strategy cannot be considered. However, if economic sanctions fail to accomplish the intended effects, if combat increases and huge numbers of Ukrainian civilians are killed, and if the government collapses, public pressure on western nations to take more dramatic action may increase.

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube and Quora