Der Westen sollte seine eigenen roten Linien setzen und nicht nur die von Putin akzeptieren, argumentiert der erfahrene Diplomat

Wolfgang Ischinger, former chairman of the Munich Security Conference, had what I thought was a great idea. So I wanted to post it here and see what you all thought:

>“Russia keeps saying, if you do this, if you cross this or that red line, we might escalate,” said the 78-year-old onetime [chairman of the Munich Security Conference](https://www.politico.eu/article/diplomacy-wolfgang-ischinger-munich-security-conference/). “Why don’t we turn this thing around and say to them: ‘We have lines and if you bomb one more civilian building, then you shouldn’t be surprised if, say, we deliver Taurus cruise missiles or America allows Ukraine to strike military targets inside Russia’?”

>That way the onus will be on Moscow to decide whether to cross the red lines — or face the consequences.

I like this idea. Instead of all this hesitating about whether or not to let Ukraine strike deep inside russia, just turn the situation around and frame it as russia’s fault that this has to happen. russia attacks civilians every day. That should be enough of a reason to allow deeper strikes inside russia. Draw a red line. Say that attacks on civilians are unacceptable, **and then back up that statement with action:** the decision to allow deep strikes into russia.

I think the constant attacks on civilians are something that just doesn’t get enough media attention anymore. Yes, sometimes it does, but often there are attacks in which maybe 1-3 people are killed, and those attacks don’t get much media coverage because sadly, they happen so often. But those 1-3 people matter. This shouldn’t be acceptable. There needs to be a red line drawn here.

Now of course russia is going to complain about “escalation” anyway, but still, let’s not just let russia define the narrative. We (Ukraine’s allies) need to take control of the narrative and draw red lines and put the blame where it belongs, on russia.

What would those red lines be? Bombing a children’s hospital? Systemically destroying schools? Torturing civilians? Kidnap Children?

Imho ATM: What the “west” is doing is to slowly escalating the response. Too slowly considering Ukrainian victims, but that’s what they are doing, limited by the US. The only way to see it change would be a dramatical increase of Putin’s level of agression toward them like cutting submarine cables, detonating a nuke on Ukrainian territory (even in almost empty area), bombing nuclear plant etc…

From the article: “Talk about, for example, the nuclear plant at Zaporizhzhia and making it safe” Is a very good point, but not just with talks. It’s a good, **justified**, reason to intervene.

Only a fools set red lines

To be honest: we have those lines already, they’re just communicated publicly like the Russians do. For them it’s all bark and no bite.

For NATO is the other way around: no bark, all bite. You cross our red lines? We send more and heavier weapons. I wouldn’t be surprised that’s the reason why our support hasn’t reached the newer stuff yet: just to leave some wiggle room in case Russia decides to up the ante once again.

No…nato should not do what putin does its dumb…if you draw a red line you need to enforce it or look like an idiot.
Its how putin is breaking his own myth and it will be his downfall.

The fact nato said no nukes or we smack you in the back of the head and then went silent means that is the words echoing in kremlins head.
Russia does not respond to bluster or bullshit…they only respond to force.
The fact they are silent but instead send stuff is the correct way to handle russia….somebody did their homework on russia and acting correctly.