A no-fly zone over Ukraine means war with Russia


If the past two weeks of war in Eastern Europe have shown us anything, it's that lots of Washington-based foreign-policy analysts and journalists love the idea of America imposing a no-fly zone over Ukraine. The first calls for declaring one came just a few days after Russia invaded the country. Most recently 27 foreign policy experts published an open letter in Politico making the case for what sounds like a more restrained ("limited") NFZ.
Limited or not, a NFZ over Ukraine would almost certainly mean war between the United States and Russia — an eventuality that just about everyone in our politics quite sensibly wants to avoid. That means imposing one is a terrible idea that people who should know better really ought to stop advocating.
No matter now limited, a NFZ requires a willingness to shoot down Russian planes that violate it — and a willingness to take the risk of our planes being shot down in the act of enforcement, both by Russian fighter jets and by ground-based anti-aircraft batteries. Even if both sides worked hard to call this air-to-air and surface-to-air combat something other than "war," an escalatory spiral would be highly likely to deliver us quite quickly to something that couldn't be described in any other way.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
In a recent sharp essay, "The Ugly Truth About No-Fly Zones," author Damir Marusic discusses all of this. But he then goes further, to think through how a limited land war could emerge out of hostilities surrounding the enforcement of a NFZ — and how Russia could well prevail (or fight to a draw) in such a battle with NATO forces.
How so? By using tactical (smaller yield) nuclear weapons against our troops on the ground. The U.S. apparently has only 230 tactical nukes, while Russia has something on the order of 2,000 of them. Even assuming such a nightmarish scenario could be kept from escalating to the use of strategic nuclear weapons (including intercontinental ballistic missiles that can wipe out entire cities), it would be extremely bad, potentially leaving NATO forces outmatched and turning Ukraine (in Marusic's words) "into a radioactive wasteland."
Now, maybe NATO could still defeat a nuclear-armed Russian army using the "smart" conventional munitions the U.S. military has prioritized over tactical nukes. But that doesn't mean we should want to test the proposition.
America has vowed to defend NATO countries in the event of a Russian attack, but we have made no such promise to Ukraine. With hostilities already underway, we need to honor that commitment to restraint. It's supremely foolish to entertain doing otherwise.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Damon Linker is a senior correspondent at TheWeek.com. He is also a former contributing editor at The New Republic and the author of The Theocons and The Religious Test.
-
America's academic brain drain has begun
IN THE SPOTLIGHT As the Trump administration targets universities and teachers, educators are eying greener academic pastures elsewhere — and other nations are starting to take notice
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Why is Musk targeting a Wisconsin Supreme Court race?
Today's Big Question His money could help conservatives, but it could also produce a Democratic backlash
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
How to pay off student loans
The explainer Don't just settle for the default repayment plan
By Becca Stanek, The Week US Published
-
Norway's windfall: should it go to Ukraine?
Talking Point Oil-based wealth fund is intended 'for future generations of Norwegians', but Putin's war poses an existential threat
By The Week UK Published
-
How feasible is a Ukraine ceasefire?
Today's Big Question Kyiv has condemned Putin's 'manipulative' response to proposed agreement
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK Published
-
Ukraine agrees to ceasefire, ending US aid freeze
Speed Read Kyiv made peace with the Trump administration by agreeing to an immediate ceasefire in its war against Russian invaders
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Trump pauses Ukraine intelligence sharing
Speed Read The decision is intended to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy into peace negotiations with Vladimir Putin
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Are we really getting a government shutdown this time?
Talking Points Democrats rebel against budget cuts by Trump, Musk
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Donald Trump's foreign policy: a gift to China?
Talking Point Trump's projection of raw, unfocused power is fuelling the sense that his America is to be feared, even by its allies
By The Week UK Published
-
Trump sides with Russia on Ukraine war anniversary
Speed Read The president's embrace of the Kremlin is a reversal of American policy
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Ukraine: three years on, is peace more elusive than ever?
Today's Big Question Europe sides with Volodymyr Zelenskyy after Donald Trump appears to endorse Moscow
By Elizabeth Carr-Ellis, The Week UK Published