Russia’s invasion of Ukraine threatens to extinguish Ukraine as an independent state and to destabilize the European continent. While the full extent of Vladimir Putin’s ambitions are not yet clear, his immediate aim is to depose the elected Ukrainian government and install a pro-Kremlin alternative in its place. His larger goal seems to be to reconstitute the Eastern core of the former Russian empire. With one Turkish ship already hit in the Black Sea and Russian artillery reportedly assembling on the Belarusian-Polish border, there is a significant risk that fighting could inadvertently or deliberately spill over into NATO territory. Already, the war has generated thousands of Ukrainian refugees. It is likely that in the coming days Russia will launch cyber-attacks on the critical infrastructure of the United States and its European allies. And it is possible that China could use the world’s preoccupation with the situation in Ukraine to launch an assault on Taiwan, risking a general conflict that would have devastating consequences for the world.
Responsibility for the war in Ukraine rests with Putin alone. But the Biden Administration’s actions have helped create the conditions for the crisis. After coming into office, it pursued high-level engagement with Putin while taking actions that cast reasonable doubt on U.S. support for Ukraine. President Biden slow-rolled notification of the military aid package to Ukraine and delayed meeting with President Zelensky to create space for engagement with Russia. He also cancelled the meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Council at the 2021 NATO Leaders Meeting, and President Biden appeared to cast shade on NATO’s Open Door Policy in comments to the press. It is reasonable to assume that these actions helped to convince Putin that the timing was propitious for military action, in much the same way that Obama’s 2009 Reset helped create the conditions for Putin’s 2014 invasion of Crimea.
Now that Putin has played his hand, it is imperative that the United States move with alacrity and speed to stabilize the situation in Europe. We need to degrade Putin’s ability to continue the war and provide serious aid to Ukraine, while seizing on the crisis as a perishable opportunity to stimulate greater European energy independence and seriousness about self-defense, with a view to a future Chinese move against Taiwan.
The United States should:
· Provide more, and more serious, military aid to Ukraine. The Ukrainian army has displayed remarkable courage and stamina in resisting the invasion and inflicting casualties on advancing Russian forces. But without immediate resupply its munitions will be depleted and it will almost inevitably be overrun. The Ukrainians also need a continuous flow of small arms ammunition, and artillery shells. They need anti-aircraft anti-tank missiles, counter-UAS rifles, loitering munitions, and mines. The United States should help the Ukrainian national government establish a national redoubt in the western portion of the country, including by providing secure communications equipment and developing overland supply routes in the event of Russian air dominance. The model for this effort should be U.S. support for the Mujahadeen insurgency in the 1980s that significantly raised the costs of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. We should work closely with Ukraine’s NATO neighbors, especially Poland and Romania, to ensure we put in place a system that continues to function.
· Apply consequential sanctions on Russia. The Administration's initial two rounds, which included sanctions on Kremlin insiders, asset freezes on large banks, and export controls, were inadequate. Subsequent actions, including especially banning sanctioned banks from the SWIFT international payments system, have helped increase the pressure but may need to be expanded if Putin continues to escalate militarily. The Administration should:
While we have no short-term mitigation or replacement options for Russia’s oil and gas exports, there are steps that the United States can take to improve resilience in international energy markets, including:
· Provide excess U.S. military articles to frontline NATO members. The United States should assess the inventory of weapons it is decommissioning for articles that could be provided on loan or purchase to frontline NATO member states. These include inter alia F-15, F-16 and A-10 aircraft. Also, the United States should consider offering an advance shipment to Poland of M1 tanks from its stock in Europe, against Warsaw’s order of 250 M1A2s. Given the dramatically increasing demand for U.S. weapons, the Administration should take immediate steps to provide incentives for major defense manufacturers to increase production of the types of munitions that the United States and its allies are most likely to need in a conflict, including armor-piercing ammunition.
• Urge Europe to continue stepping up. The war in Ukraine is focusing the attention of European governments on the urgent need to do more for the security of the European continent. Germany’s suspension of development of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and historic increase in defense budget demonstrate that the crisis presents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to increase burden-sharing. But fully exploiting this opportunity will require active U.S. diplomacy. The Administration should:
· Strengthen NATO’s frontline. As the FAL Defense Working Group has pointed out, it is imperative that the United States keep the potential for a Chinese move against Taiwan in mind when evaluating available military assets for the European theater. At the same time, the United States already has significant forces within the European theater and should use these to maximum effect to demonstrate its resolve and capability for honoring Article 5. This is especially important in the present phase of the conflict, when public reports suggest that Putin is massing artillery on the Belarusian-Polish border. The United States should press NATO to relinquish the now defunct U.S.-NATO Founding Act and move to build permanent military installations in Poland and Romania, while enhancing its rotational presence in the Baltics. The Administration should rethink its unwillingness to support the 3Seas Initiative, with an eye to urgent infrastructure projects that enhance North-South military mobility along NATO’s Eastern flank.
· Cut diplomatic relations with the Russian Federation. In light of the scale and human costs of the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine, the US should not maintain normal diplomatic intercourse with Moscow. It should close the Russian Embassy and Consulates and eject as large a number of Russian diplomatic personnel as practically feasible, paring links down to only the most urgent of communication channels. The bureaucratic temptation to do otherwise, by implementing a variety of carve-outs, will be great. But the severity of Putin’s actions in Ukraine and the perniciousness of the threat he poses to us and our allies shows that no constructive diplomatic interaction can occur under the current circumstances.
In all of these areas, there is no time to waste. While Ukraine is putting up a brave fight, it cannot hold out indefinitely without meaningful help from the outside. The U.S. strategic aim should be to nurture a Ukrainian ulcer that bleeds Russia white and forces it to rethink its current foreign policy. To date, the Biden Administration’s efforts have not been sufficient to the task. The United States and its allies need to move quickly to provide additional warfighting materiel while applying their maximum economic tools at their disposal to constrict the Russian energy sector and reinforce the NATO frontier. Failure to act decisively will speed Russia’s advance and present NATO with even greater risks in the days ahead.
Several indicators suggest that Putin may be preparing to attempt an invasion and annexation of Eastern Ukraine. The United States should take these immediate actions to deter Russia, support Ukraine, and reassure frontline NATO allies.
Maintaining close ties with Europe is important – but so is ensuring that America’s alliances there perform in ways that benefit the United States and not our geopolitical rivals. Read FAL's 10 principles that should inform U.S. policy in Europe.
In its Missile Defense Review (MDR), the Biden Administration should be careful to avoid a repeat of its predecessors’ mistakes by issuing a missile defense strategy and policy that can last beyond the next Presidential election and continue policies and programs that will strengthen U.S. national security.