The Guardian columnist Simon Tisdall argued that NATO forces should "declare their intention to impose a no-fly zone," stating that "the paradox is that the more successful and long-lived Ukraine's resistance is, the bigger the dangers for Nato. Yet if by supporting it, the allies cannot ultimately avoid being drawn into conflict with Russia, why delay the inevitable?"[11] Sophy Antrobus of King’s College London argued that a no-fly zone would "probably not" have the intended effects, but argued against ruling one out, stating that doing so risked creating an "escalation paradox," where "if any action from the west that isn't solely reactive to Russia's activities is ruled out, then we are destined to remain reactive in perpetuity."[12]