Is America dragged into a direct war with Russia?

Two and a half months into the Russian invasion of Ukraine, questions are growing inside and outside Washington about the extent to which the Biden administration is willing to go to help Ukraine fight the Russians while also trying to avoid provoking Moscow and being drawn into direct conflict with it.

Recent reports indicated that Washington's sharing of intelligence information with Kyiv, has contributed to the successful strikes against senior Russian leaders and the important warship in the Russian Navy "Moskva".

Administration officials insist there are clear limits on the intelligence Washington shares with Ukraine, including a prohibition on providing accurate intelligence to target senior Russian leaders, as part of the White House's efforts to avoid crossing a line that Moscow might consider dangerously escalatory.

From the beginning of the Ukraine crisis, President Biden aimed not to make it a Russian-American crisis, and wanted to portray it only as a crisis related to Ukraine's sovereignty and Russia's violations of international law.

Washington adopted a three-dimensional principled policy, the first of which represented imposing huge sanctions on Russia, the second of sending thousands of American soldiers to deploy in NATO countries near Ukraine, and the third of providing military and financial aid to the Ukrainian side.

Since the beginning of the war, the Biden administration has had a very clear red line that it will not cross.

This line is that US forces will not interfere in the fight against invading Russian forces in Ukraine, which is a non-NATO country.

"As you know, the intervention of our forces would lead to the outbreak of World War III," Biden said.

Biden stressed that his country would only intervene militarily to defend every inch of the territory of the NATO countries if any of them were attacked.

However, a careful follow-up of the developments and steps of the US approach towards the Ukrainian war would leave some doubts about the credibility of Washington's assurances not to intervene in the conflict directly, whether that was done with its direct desire, or that it would be forced to intervene against its will.

I imagine that what the US dealing with the war in Ukraine has witnessed during the past two weeks is nothing but an American approach more and more to the previously announced red line by avoiding involvement in the fighting.

So far, Russia has not taken any direct action against the United States or any of the NATO countries in response to its continued military and intelligence support.

Russia has not attempted to strike arms shipments flowing through Poland, and only recently has Russia begun targeting a railway network inside Ukraine that is believed to be carrying American and Western weapons on its way to Ukrainian forces.

Russia understands that when it comes to conventional military power, the United States is far ahead of Russia, and this has some experts worried that Russia will have to respond in unconventional ways.

From the beginning of the Ukraine crisis, President Biden's goal was not to make it a Russian-American crisis, and he wanted to portray it only as a crisis related to Ukraine's sovereignty and Russia's violations of international law.

Washington adopted a three-dimensional principled policy, the first of which represented imposing huge sanctions on Russia, the second of sending thousands of American soldiers to deploy in NATO countries near Ukraine, and the third of providing military and financial aid to the Ukrainian side.

However, this strategy witnessed a development and change that prompted Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to threaten what his country considers blatant American hostility, represented in providing offensive weapons to the Ukrainian side, causing the deaths of hundreds and perhaps thousands of Russian soldiers.

Lavrov spoke of the increasing danger of a nuclear war or of a third world war, and the Russian minister said a few days ago that "the risks are now high" when assessing the possibility of the war in Ukraine turning into a nuclear conflict.

A few days ago, President Biden called on Congress to allocate additional funding worth $33 billion with the aim of increasing military assistance to Ukraine to enable it to confront the Russian army.

"We need more money to ensure that the United States continues to send weapons and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine," Biden said.

Every day, around the clock, US weapons and ammunition, including anti-tank and anti-aircraft missile systems, helicopters, drones, grenade launchers, and more than 50 million rounds of ammunition arrives in Ukraine.

In addition to providing weapons, Washington is making strenuous efforts to support the Ukrainian side, intelligence and financially, while avoiding the appearance of being in a direct confrontation with Russia.

Although Biden's Secret Service refused to allow him to visit Kyiv, Washington decided to send Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin together.

The visit of the two ministers, and the subsequent visit of senior members of Congress to Kiev and their meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky, represented an additional important step in the US escalation and at the same time showing full support for Ukraine.

After his visit to Kiev, Defense Minister Austin was asked about Washington's goals in Ukraine, and he replied, "We want to see Russia weaken to the point that it cannot do what it did in invading Ukraine again."

Simply put, this means that Russia will emerge from the Ukrainian conflict as a strategically weak state.

The minister's statements indicated that Washington's real goal is to weaken the Russian military power for years to come.

Then Washington formed a contact group of 40 countries, which met last month in Germany, with the aim of coordinating the long-term resupply of Ukraine with military equipment.

They announced that Ukraine would, over time, begin to use the types of modern weapons used by NATO armies, and the consequent training for them to use them.

In recent weeks, Washington has trained thousands of Ukrainians outside the country in weapons and then transferred them into Ukraine.

At the start of the war, Washington stated that its objectives in this conflict had more to do with Ukraine than with Russia.

It was about the Biden administration's attempt to get the Russians to withdraw their forces away from the border, including attempts to persuade the Russians to enter into negotiations and a diplomatic process with the Ukrainians.

This coincided with the imposition of economic sanctions to increase the cost of the war for Russia.

What Washington is doing reflects a path fraught with danger from many sides, and US support for Ukraine could go wrong.

At a time when Washington is shipping effective weapons and heavy weapons very quickly to Ukraine, the Russians view this as an offensive act.

And we have to imagine that at some point, the Russians will say, we're going to target these shipments inside NATO territory, whether in Poland or Romania.

And this is the moment no one wants, as Biden has repeatedly vowed that he will defend every inch of NATO territory.

This is the major gamble that Joe Biden is playing without knowing!