U.S. Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall recently delivered a chilling warning that a war between the United States and either Russia or China is not only possible but could happen "at any time." Speaking to cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy on November 12, Kendall emphasized the urgent need to prepare for such a conflict, stating that his main objective is to instill a sense of urgency regarding the potential for war. Kendall highlighted China's growing military presence in the Western Pacific, particularly around Taiwan and the South China Sea, as well as Russia's increasing willingness to use force, even considering the deployment of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. He noted that the threat of nuclear conflict has become more real than ever, with Russia's reliance on its nuclear arsenal and China's expansion of its own nuclear capabilities.

In addition to the growing military tensions between the U.S., Russia, and China, Kendall also addressed the risks posed by these nations' nuclear capabilities. He pointed out that the concept of nuclear deterrence, which had kept peace between nuclear powers during the Cold War, is now being put to the test, and the stakes are much higher than ever before. Kendall warned that the United States must be prepared for the possibility of nuclear conflict, as both Russia and China are strengthening their nuclear arsenals and advancing their strategies for potential military confrontations. To avoid catastrophic outcomes, Kendall stressed that the U.S. must maintain its competitive edge and readiness for war, should deterrence fail.

Kendall’s deputy, Melissa Dalton, echoed these concerns in September, urging the nation to modernize its nuclear capabilities to stay ahead of growing threats from Russia and China, both of which have large and expanding nuclear arsenals. Meanwhile, the Pentagon has adjusted its nuclear deterrence strategy to account for the growing risk of facing multiple nuclear-armed adversaries simultaneously. The U.S. now faces two nuclear powers with expanding capabilities, which adds a layer of complexity to global security concerns.

The Warning from Dmitry Medvedev

Amid rising tensions, Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's Deputy Chairman of the Security Council, issued a warning regarding the potential for nuclear conflict. Medvedev criticized discussions in the U.S. about transferring nuclear weapons to Ukraine, a move that he deemed an act of aggression against Russia. In a post on Telegram, Medvedev expressed outrage at the idea, suggesting that it could trigger a nuclear conflict with Russia, and warned that the potential consequences would be devastating. He emphasized that the transfer of nuclear weapons to Ukraine could be interpreted as an attack on Russia, citing Russia's nuclear doctrine, which permits the use of nuclear weapons in response to aggression that threatens the existence of the state.

Medvedev’s remarks highlight the increasingly volatile nature of international relations, particularly as Russia has updated its nuclear policy to emphasize deterrence against perceived threats. He also pointed out the implications of Western support for Ukraine, particularly as it relates to long-range weaponry, which has been provided by the U.S. and its allies. He warned that such actions could lead to a retaliatory strike from Russia, possibly escalating into World War III. Medvedev’s comments underscore Russia’s reliance on nuclear deterrence as a key element of its military strategy and its willingness to escalate tensions further in response to Western support for Ukraine.

Background:

The war in Ukraine, which has now been ongoing for over 1,000 days, has seen significant shifts in the global geopolitical landscape. Russia’s actions, including the recruitment of foreign mercenaries and the continued bombardment of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, have intensified the conflict. Despite Russia’s aggressive tactics, there has been a perception in the West that the provision of military aid to Ukraine has been relatively cautious and gradual. Western nations, particularly the U.S., have incrementally increased their support for Ukraine, supplying more advanced weaponry and easing restrictions on the use of certain military assets. However, some argue that this incremental approach has not been enough to allow Ukraine to fully defend its territory and push Russia back.

While the West has been hesitant to give Ukraine the tools it needs for a decisive victory, some argue that this policy has inadvertently prolonged the war and resulted in unnecessary casualties. Had Ukraine received stronger military support earlier, it might have been in a better position to defend itself and deter Russia from launching a full-scale invasion. Instead, the conflict has evolved into a protracted and costly war, with both sides suffering heavy losses.

The debate over whether the West is escalating the war continues, with some accusing the U.S. and its allies of fueling the conflict by providing Ukraine with increasingly advanced weaponry. However, others argue that the West’s response has been too slow and too limited, preventing Ukraine from achieving the military advantage it needs. As the war drags on, the question remains whether the West will take a more proactive approach to securing Ukraine’s sovereignty and defending European security, or whether it will continue to adopt a more cautious stance in the face of escalating nuclear threats from Russia.

In this context, some commentators suggest that Ukraine’s struggle for survival is also a broader battle for European and global security. If Ukraine is not supported decisively, it risks being swallowed up by Russian aggression, with serious implications for other nations in the region, such as Poland and the Baltic states. The ultimate question remains whether the West will continue to provide Ukraine with the tools it needs to win or whether the conflict will continue to be managed without a clear end in sight.

Sources:

• Newsweek
• The Guardian