Nice to read your proposed solutions/paths forward, let's hope to see some or all of them in the near future.
What I still don't understand is why an invitation to Ukraine into NATO is seen as bringing the US or other members into the war; from what I understand, Article 5 doesn't kick in until actual, official membership, which would take time (years?). Wouldn't the benefits of inviting them outweigh whatever worries the Biden Admin. has on this?
Unfortunately, some of the Biden Administration’s policy implementation processes (e.g. sequential response is not strategic in this circumstance) and public comments continue to convey uncertainty and irresoluteness and allow for the perception that Moscow is dictating US policy and that the president is ceding escalation dominance to the Russians.
Don’t state what we will not do—alternatively do what is required and accordingly project US power and confidence. Aiming to win a war is the best way to fight it—Escalation dominance (or the perception of it)should not be ceded to the opponent. Self-deterrence is not an efficacious policy.
Freedom of navigation has served as a principle of the post-World War II system of world order and is our guiding doctrinal strategy in the Indo-pacific. President Biden should enforce a freedom of navigation operation (FONOP)in the Black Sea. If you’re not willing to enforce this principle in the Black Sea( and geographically it has more NATO territory than it does Russian) what does that convey to Beijing in the Indo-Pacific? The world is watching— and it’s past time to respond. Fundamentally, secure and open the Black Sea— it’s not a Russian lake.
Good points about the non-Russian lake, the Black Sea. I don't understand this either, how the world lets the Russians continue to hijack the export of essential foodstuffs. It can't go on.
It seems the Ukrainians are caught in a Catch-22. Ukraine won't be safe until it's part of NATO, and Ukraine won't be part of NATO until it's safe. Like the Ukrainians, I'm increasingly annoyed that Western powers seem impotent to unravel this defeatist equation.
One way to begin to unravel this trap would be for willing NATO nations to enter Ukraine in force, and take on any useful jobs other than direct combat with the Russians. This wouldn't require universal agreement among NATO nations, or NATO membership for Ukraine. There must be a million things that need to be done in Ukraine while most of the Ukrainian men are involved in the war. This could happen immediately, now, today, not off in some vague undefined maybe someday future.
Such a move by willing NATO nations would make clear to the Russians in actions, instead of just words, that Ukraine is going to become part of the West, and there's nothing the Russians can do about it.
Those NATO forces in Ukraine could serve as a backup to the frontline Ukraine forces, ensuring that no Russian breakout can be successful in endangering the part of Ukraine which is currently free. That's an 80% victory for Ukraine, which could happen immediately.
If it did become necessary for NATO forces in Ukraine to engage the Russians, so what? What can the Russians do about that?
1) If the Russians can't beat the Ukrainians on their own, the Russians certainly would have no hope against Ukrainian and NATO forces combined.
2) If the Russians used one or more tactical nukes in Ukraine that would make it dramatically easier to unite the world against the Russian economy.
3) If Russia attacked NATO countries with nukes, that would result in the immediate death of Putin and his regime. Putin isn't a religious fanatic dreaming of paradise in heaven, he's just a mob boss who isn't going to give his life to make a useless point. Putin's nuclear saber rattling is indeed a bluff.
To further reduce the chance of a direct conflict between Russia and the West the Ukrainians could disengage Russian forces, and shift the battle for occupied Ukraine from a military to financial war. The combined GDP of the Western allies is 20 to 30 times that of Russia. We can survive the hit from a financial war, and Russia can't.
Finally, the clock it ticking.
Putin's strategy is to wear down Western resolve with a never ending grinding war of attrition, and if given enough time, his strategy will work. If the Ukrainian offensive doesn't produce big results this year, the political tide in the West will start to turn against what will be called "yet another forever war". If Republicans win the 2024 election in American, Ukraine will be in big trouble.
Now is the time for the West to make it's move, and if we don't, a year or two from now we may have to stand by and watch as Russia over runs the exhausted Ukrainian forces who have lost Western support.
Willing NATO nations need to enter Ukraine in force today. There's plenty of work for them to do other than fighting Russia directly.
You are right when you mention that not accepting Ukraine into NATO until the war is over only encourages Putin to drag the conflict.
I know there is a risk, but an option would be to accept Ukraine into NATO with the territory they now have under control, and be willing to stand behind them. Expelling Russians out of the rest of Ukraine would be up to Ukrainian’s with our weapons. That would secure Ukraine’s existence, and allow them to focus all their resources into expelling the enemy out of their territory.
Like it or not, if Russia is to be stopped, we’ll have to get more involved confronting them, and the more worn out they are the better for us. If communists end up succeeding in Ukraine the West and its allies will later have to pay a much heftier price for now fearing Putin and his cronies. What do you think?
I like your idea of somehow securing free Ukraine.
NATO membership is tricky, so why not set that aside for now, and not let it be an obstacle. There's nothing stopping willing NATO nations from entering Ukraine in force immediately. Universal agreement among NATO nations would not be necessary. Formal treaties would not be necessary. Negotiations with Putin would not be necessary. Engagement with Russian forces would not be necessary.
If the decision to extend and invite to Ukraine to join NATO and it takes years, it won't be Biden making that decision even if it takes five more years. It will be the US President elected in 2028 that will make that decision. The entry to NATO should be shortened if there is a ceasefire the offer should be extended immediately, and I suspect Ukraine will join. The current President of Ukraine is a wartime President, how will he fare during a period of peace. A US conflict with China will totally shift the US's war machine away from Ukraine to a more pressing threat.
Why don't we stop talking about NATO membership, for now. Are Western nations using all this talk about NATO membership as an excuse to not send troops in to Ukraine to do SOMETHING? Why can't willing NATO nations simply roll across the border in to Ukraine immediately?
Nice to read your proposed solutions/paths forward, let's hope to see some or all of them in the near future.
What I still don't understand is why an invitation to Ukraine into NATO is seen as bringing the US or other members into the war; from what I understand, Article 5 doesn't kick in until actual, official membership, which would take time (years?). Wouldn't the benefits of inviting them outweigh whatever worries the Biden Admin. has on this?
Well-written article.
Some additional extemporaneous thoughts:
Unfortunately, some of the Biden Administration’s policy implementation processes (e.g. sequential response is not strategic in this circumstance) and public comments continue to convey uncertainty and irresoluteness and allow for the perception that Moscow is dictating US policy and that the president is ceding escalation dominance to the Russians.
Don’t state what we will not do—alternatively do what is required and accordingly project US power and confidence. Aiming to win a war is the best way to fight it—Escalation dominance (or the perception of it)should not be ceded to the opponent. Self-deterrence is not an efficacious policy.
Freedom of navigation has served as a principle of the post-World War II system of world order and is our guiding doctrinal strategy in the Indo-pacific. President Biden should enforce a freedom of navigation operation (FONOP)in the Black Sea. If you’re not willing to enforce this principle in the Black Sea( and geographically it has more NATO territory than it does Russian) what does that convey to Beijing in the Indo-Pacific? The world is watching— and it’s past time to respond. Fundamentally, secure and open the Black Sea— it’s not a Russian lake.
Good points about the non-Russian lake, the Black Sea. I don't understand this either, how the world lets the Russians continue to hijack the export of essential foodstuffs. It can't go on.
The world is using Putin's nuke bluffs as an excuse not to act.
It seems the Ukrainians are caught in a Catch-22. Ukraine won't be safe until it's part of NATO, and Ukraine won't be part of NATO until it's safe. Like the Ukrainians, I'm increasingly annoyed that Western powers seem impotent to unravel this defeatist equation.
One way to begin to unravel this trap would be for willing NATO nations to enter Ukraine in force, and take on any useful jobs other than direct combat with the Russians. This wouldn't require universal agreement among NATO nations, or NATO membership for Ukraine. There must be a million things that need to be done in Ukraine while most of the Ukrainian men are involved in the war. This could happen immediately, now, today, not off in some vague undefined maybe someday future.
Such a move by willing NATO nations would make clear to the Russians in actions, instead of just words, that Ukraine is going to become part of the West, and there's nothing the Russians can do about it.
Those NATO forces in Ukraine could serve as a backup to the frontline Ukraine forces, ensuring that no Russian breakout can be successful in endangering the part of Ukraine which is currently free. That's an 80% victory for Ukraine, which could happen immediately.
If it did become necessary for NATO forces in Ukraine to engage the Russians, so what? What can the Russians do about that?
1) If the Russians can't beat the Ukrainians on their own, the Russians certainly would have no hope against Ukrainian and NATO forces combined.
2) If the Russians used one or more tactical nukes in Ukraine that would make it dramatically easier to unite the world against the Russian economy.
3) If Russia attacked NATO countries with nukes, that would result in the immediate death of Putin and his regime. Putin isn't a religious fanatic dreaming of paradise in heaven, he's just a mob boss who isn't going to give his life to make a useless point. Putin's nuclear saber rattling is indeed a bluff.
To further reduce the chance of a direct conflict between Russia and the West the Ukrainians could disengage Russian forces, and shift the battle for occupied Ukraine from a military to financial war. The combined GDP of the Western allies is 20 to 30 times that of Russia. We can survive the hit from a financial war, and Russia can't.
Finally, the clock it ticking.
Putin's strategy is to wear down Western resolve with a never ending grinding war of attrition, and if given enough time, his strategy will work. If the Ukrainian offensive doesn't produce big results this year, the political tide in the West will start to turn against what will be called "yet another forever war". If Republicans win the 2024 election in American, Ukraine will be in big trouble.
Now is the time for the West to make it's move, and if we don't, a year or two from now we may have to stand by and watch as Russia over runs the exhausted Ukrainian forces who have lost Western support.
Willing NATO nations need to enter Ukraine in force today. There's plenty of work for them to do other than fighting Russia directly.
Congratulations, its is a good article.
You are right when you mention that not accepting Ukraine into NATO until the war is over only encourages Putin to drag the conflict.
I know there is a risk, but an option would be to accept Ukraine into NATO with the territory they now have under control, and be willing to stand behind them. Expelling Russians out of the rest of Ukraine would be up to Ukrainian’s with our weapons. That would secure Ukraine’s existence, and allow them to focus all their resources into expelling the enemy out of their territory.
Like it or not, if Russia is to be stopped, we’ll have to get more involved confronting them, and the more worn out they are the better for us. If communists end up succeeding in Ukraine the West and its allies will later have to pay a much heftier price for now fearing Putin and his cronies. What do you think?
I like your idea of somehow securing free Ukraine.
NATO membership is tricky, so why not set that aside for now, and not let it be an obstacle. There's nothing stopping willing NATO nations from entering Ukraine in force immediately. Universal agreement among NATO nations would not be necessary. Formal treaties would not be necessary. Negotiations with Putin would not be necessary. Engagement with Russian forces would not be necessary.
What are they waiting for?
If the decision to extend and invite to Ukraine to join NATO and it takes years, it won't be Biden making that decision even if it takes five more years. It will be the US President elected in 2028 that will make that decision. The entry to NATO should be shortened if there is a ceasefire the offer should be extended immediately, and I suspect Ukraine will join. The current President of Ukraine is a wartime President, how will he fare during a period of peace. A US conflict with China will totally shift the US's war machine away from Ukraine to a more pressing threat.
Why don't we stop talking about NATO membership, for now. Are Western nations using all this talk about NATO membership as an excuse to not send troops in to Ukraine to do SOMETHING? Why can't willing NATO nations simply roll across the border in to Ukraine immediately?