Ukrainian President Volodimir Zelensky pleads with Westerners to ban Russian planes from entering Ukrainian airspace, but NATO has so far refused to impose a no-fly zone for fear of provoking a military escalation. Why?
What is a no-fly zone?
A no-fly zone is a territory over which any aircraft is prohibited from flying. If an airplane does not respect it, it can be shot down. This measure is often applied in times of war to prevent the bombing of civilians, for example.
It is legal under international law when it is based on a UN resolution, such as the ban on flying over Iraq decided in the 1990s to protect Shiite minorities in the south and Kurdish minorities in the north, from bombing, particularly with weapons chemicals, from Saddam Hussein’s regime.
But when it is decreed by one or more external powers, it can be considered an act of war. And it’s an expensive operation, requiring constant surveillance and aerial rotations.
Between 1993 and 1995, NATO banned Bosnia’s airspace, in accordance with a UN resolution. The United Nations also imposed a no-fly zone in Libya in 2011, which NATO put into effect.
Why impose it?
The Ukrainian government is asking for airspace to be closed to guarantee evacuation corridors for civilians from cities besieged by Russian forces, especially Mariupol in the south, Kharkov in the east or even kyiv, the capital.
Its proponents argue that a no-fly zone would prevent Russian planes from bombing Ukrainian cities. It would also prevent Ukrainian aircraft from flying so kyiv would no longer be able to fly its drones, which its forces have used successfully against Russian forces.
Why does the West refuse?
The United States and NATO officials have clearly rejected the idea of a no-fly zone, saying it would amount to an act of war on their part.
“The only way to implement a no-fly zone is to send NATO warplanes into Ukrainian airspace and then shoot down Russian planes to enforce it,” Alliance Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg explained on March 4.
“We have a responsibility to prevent this war from escalating beyond Ukraine. Because that would be even more dangerous, more devastating and would cause even more suffering,” he added.
The next day, President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia would consider any country attempting to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine to be a co-belligerent.
And a “limited”, would it be possible?
Last week, a group of US experts called in an open letter to NATO for a “limited” no-fly zone in Ukraine to allow the creation of humanitarian corridors.
But other experts have pointed out that to enforce this measure, NATO planes would still risk having to shoot down Russian planes, which would amount to an act of war.
It would be useful?
So far the fighting in Ukraine has been mainly on the ground. Russian forces have used long-range missiles and heavy artillery fire to attack Ukrainian cities. The Ukrainian resistance was also deployed on the ground.
A Pentagon official claimed Monday that the weekend attack on a Ukrainian military base near the Polish border was carried out with cruise missiles fired from Russian airspace.
“I would highlight that we estimate that all of these air-to-ground cruise missiles were fired by Russian long-range bombers from Russian airspace, not from Ukrainian airspace,” said the official, who requested anonymity.
“For advocates of a no-fly zone, this is an example of where a no-fly zone would have no effect,” he added. (I)
Source: Eluniverso
Paul is a talented author and journalist with a passion for entertainment and general news. He currently works as a writer at the 247 News Agency, where he has established herself as a respected voice in the industry.
