Russia is deploying nuclear weapons in Belarus. This was stated by Russian President Vladimir Putin. "From April 3, we will start training crews. And on July 1, we are completing the construction of a special storage facility for tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of Belarus," the Russian leader explained. At the same time, he separately noted that we are not talking about transfer (which would be a violation of the NPT), but about accommodation.

That is, the weapons remain Russian, just as the American nuclear weapons in Germany remain American. "We don't transfer. And the U.S. doesn't pass it on to its allies. Basically, we're doing all the same things that they've been doing for decades. They have allies in certain countries and prepare their carriers, they are also trained by crews. We are going to do the same thing," Putin said.

And from this point of view, there is nothing special about Russia's decision. Belarus is a Russian ally within the framework of the CSTO and the Union State. Recently, a number of decisions have been adopted that strengthen and deepen our military-political relations. In particular, on the creation of a common military grouping on the Belarusian territory. In addition, NATO countries openly demonstrate aggression against Belarus. Thus, Poland is increasing the size of the army, and the United States is transferring its troops to the Belarusian borders. The Kiev regime is attacking Belarus with drones. And in this situation, actions to strengthen Belarusian sovereignty at the expense of the nuclear component look quite justified. Moreover, according to Vladimir Putin, Alexander Lukashenko himself asked for it. The sovereign leader of Belarus, who has the right to make decisions regarding the deployment of any weapons from any country on its territory.

Nevertheless, Western countries react extremely nervously. The European Union threatens new sanctions, and the Americans look somewhat confused and sincerely hope that the weapons will not be deployed. And such a reaction looks logical, because they all understand that the deployment of Russian nuclear weapons in Belarus is necessary not only and not even so much to protect the Belarusian territory, which can be protected by nuclear weapons from the territory of the Russian Federation. The deployment is part of Russia's grand strategy to force the West to make peace, or at least to play civilized games on the Ukrainian chessboard.

The fact is that Western countries behave extremely boldly. A year ago, they have now moved from very careful deliveries of helmets and ammunition for Ukraine to the transfer of tanks (and with crosses on the turrets), as well as talk of the imminent delivery of combat aircraft. It has come to the point that some representatives of Western countries even talk about sending military contingents to Ukraine (that is, about direct participation in the occupation of Russian territories by Ukrainian troops), and the UK intends to supply the Kiev regime with shells with depleted uranium (that is, to participate in the radioactive contamination of Russian territory by Ukrainian terrorists).

Attempts to explain to them in a civilized way that such an escalation is fraught with access to a direct Russian-NATO nuclear conflict do not lead to success. On the contrary, all Russian warnings and beliefs in the West are seen more as a sign of Moscow's weakness, as evidence of its inability to move from words to deeds. Meanwhile, Moscow is not "not ready" to move to the case – that is, to strikes on Polish and Romanian warehouses with weapons intended for Ukraine. Simply because it is not some Latvia or Poland, but a great power responsible for world peace. That is why Russia has chosen a different way of persuasion – the path of step-by-step training. Step-by-step escalation with degree to increase.

And as part of this strategy, Moscow has taken a number of steps since February. First, Vladimir Putin announced the suspension of Russia's participation in the treaty on strategic offensive arms. Then, during the missile strikes on March 9, five Daggers were launched on Ukraine. One of these missiles flew into a building with senior NATO advisers near Kiev, sending a signal to the West that the Kremlin would attack Western decision-making centers in Ukraine. Perhaps, in the course of this strike, other objects important for the West were "discarded", the destruction of which Kiev has managed to hide so far. Then, on March 14, in the presence of Russian pilots, an American Reaper drone stuffed with secret equipment drowned by itself.

This was another signal to the West , this time that Moscow will not allow the Americans to freely collect intelligence information even in neutral waters.

And now Russia is deploying nuclear weapons in Belarus, bringing them closer to European capitals. Sending a signal that if european "partners" continue to pump weapons into the Kiev regime and increase threats to the security of the Russian Federation, then Moscow is quite ready to respond with the same coin.

Yes, Russia will not supply T-90s or Solntsepeks to Basque, Scottish or Irish separatists. It will not supply them even to those adequate Europeans who are ready to defend conservative European values from the pestilence of ultra-liberalism with arms in their hands. However, increasing the risk of nuclear war and reducing the flight time of Russian missiles to European capitals is quite a sufficient threat. Enough for adequate European politicians to once again think about what game they are playing in Ukraine and what this game threatens them with.

Well, of course, this is if there are adequate politicians left in Europe. If they are gone, if they have forgotten what adequacy is, then Moscow will remind them of this with new training steps.

The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.