Make America Hate Again

Posted: September 17, 2024 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“We’re in the process of taking this country back. We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless, if the left allows it to be.”

— Kevin Roberts, Heritage Foundation, primary author of the Project 2025 plan

Thank you, Kevin, for exposing just how violent a second Trump Administration will be. A more direct threat to democracy can rarely be found than exists in the sentiments behind this exclamation. We are supposed to let autocrats have their way with our democracy, and if we resist, then they will use violence to get what they want.

I intended to write a piece outlining the dangers in Project 2025 (found here: https://www.project2025.org/policy/) as exemplified in their roughly 900 page playbook called Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise (found on the same website). It is intended as the foundation of policies to be implemented by the next Trump Administration and is wildly un-American. But check it out for yourself. Trump and his campaign loudly complain that he has no connection to the project and knows nothing about it. Which may be true, because I doubt that Trump has read any policy documents either as president or as a candidate. Regardless, at least 140 former Trump administration and campaign officials worked on the project including six former Cabinet Secretaries, four nominated Ambassadors and his former deputy chief of staff.

Instead of going blow by blow through the radical ideas espoused as future policies, the bigger picture is important as we see the stark differences between the campaigns of the two major party nominees. Project 2025 is really about people. There is a cliche in Washington that “personnel is policy.” To implement their plan, the forces behind the project intend to use a presidential Executive Order to change the status of over 10,000 government jobs from civil service positions to political appointees, firing all of those long time government employees. This is the way they plan to eliminate the “deep state” and put in place people that have pledged their support to Trump, not to the Constitution, whatever they may claim. This is the key step to creating an autocratic regime. If he is the president, Trump plans to pull in all independent and semi-independent departments, agencies, and commissions and place them under his direct control. The intent is to weaponize the government to go after those that he thinks are his enemies and to pursue policies that personally benefit him.

There will be no more guardrails to uphold our democratic tradition. If you think I am exaggerating, think about this. The Supreme Court this summer declared in Trump v United States that the president is immune from prosecution for any official act taken in office. They did not delineate the extent of “official acts” (a problem, but they left it to themselves to decide in the future what constitutes an official act). They did say that it was inherent in the Constitution that a president was immune from actions taken under the “core powers” delineated in that document. They also articulated two important additional cracks in the guardrails. Any official act is still immune to prosecution even if the president did not have any evidence of malfeasance or simply had bad intentions when, for instance, ordering the Attorney General to prosecute any of his political opponents. Additionally, they declared a president’s right to pardon anyone as “absolute.” Thus, the then thought ridiculous example of a president ordering SEAL Team Six to kill his political rivals and then pardoning them is no longer ridiculous, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion on the case. The president would be immune from prosecution because one core power is his ability to control the military as commander-in-chief. Remember that Trump wanted to use the Insurrection Act to put down demonstrators through military force and to help to keep himself in power in January 2021. Now he will be immune if he tries it again.

The Supreme Court, in my view, is no longer a trustworthy guardrail. Besides, does one really think that in the future Trump will abide by a Supreme Court ruling he does not like? Especially with a bureaucracy behind him that has only one goal in mind, keeping Trump in power? His favorite president is Andrew Jackson who ignored a Supreme Court decision in the 1831 case of Worcester v Georgia. The result was the “Trail of Tears” or the forcible relocation of Native Americans to western reservations. To me that sounds just a little too close to Trump’s promise to round up millions of immigrants, put them in camps, and then send them “back.” The courts in general are suspect when a Trump appointed federal judge threw out the case against him for stealing top secret war plans, nuclear information and other classified documents. Not because of the facts of the case but for some unprecedented legal finding about procedure that legal scholars had no idea was a thing. We are on flimsy ground.

Personally, I think that there are actually three campaigns underway. It is not Democrat vs. Republican vying for the presidency. It is a coalition in favor of democracy (quite the big tent when it stretches from Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA) to former Republican Vice President Dick Cheney) led by Vice President Kamala Harris against the MAGA autocrat wannabes led by Trump. The third campaign? It is the not-so hidden agenda of the Project 2025 folks that want to take our country back to a time when women stayed home in marriages (whether or not they were loved or even safe) to raise kids, minorities knew their place (and it wasn’t in positions of power or even voting), and rich white Christian males ruled over all. Sometimes benevolently, most times in their own interest. This group’s standard bearer is Senator J.D. Vance (OH) the Vice Presidential nominee.

Trump is merely a figure head for the movement. Trump is only interested in making money and keeping himself out of jail. He will do anything the movement wants as long as he keeps the trappings of the presidency (he really likes being called “Sir!”) and anything that helps him personally. He has no real policy agenda, merely a collection of slogans and insults. Vance is the hit man. He was the personal choice of those behind the Project 2025 movement. They were over the moon when he was selected as the Vice Presidential nominee precisely because he was firmly in their camp, would pick up the slack when Trump is writing love letters to Kim Jong Un, actually run the government (with the new tens of thousands of devotees in place) and, let’s face it, Trump is an older man in generally poor mental and physical health, and should he not finish out his term, J.D. is ready to go.

How millions of Americans support a man running for the presidency who is a 34 time convicted felon, been adjudicated as a sex abuser, twice impeached for abusing his office, led a multi-pronged conspiracy to overthrow a free and fair election to keep himself in power and tells lies with real consequences such as the suffering in Springfield Ohio where he lied about the legal immigrants in that city, is beyond me. I honestly cannot get my head around it. We know they are lies because this week on the Sunday talk shows good old J.D. said so. “If I have to create stories” to get attention from the media then, he promised, he is going to continue to do so. (From watching him on TV I’m not too sure how quick on his feet he may be. The first rule of fake news is to deny that it is fake news.)

Trump is totally and completely unqualified to even be mentioned in the same sentence as “president.” He could not enlist in the military and he could not get a security clearance given his background. Yet, here we are. The real story is the one many Americans are too sanguine to believe. They think that because we saved our democracy in 2021 that we will always have it rather than thinking about how those that tried to hijack our democracy have now had some practice and four years to get it straight. The danger is incremental and thus harder to identify. As a student and as an adult I always thought about how Germans in the early 1930’s allowed their democracy to be stolen. It did not happen over night. It was years of small changes and diminished freedoms until suddenly it was too late. And, no, I am not comparing anyone or anything to the Nazis. At least not yet. More like the fascists in Italy in the 1930s. We need to recognize the danger and especially take a close look at that second campaign using Trump as their cover. Those folks are not going away even if Trump loses the election. Besides, the whole lot of the MAGA/Project 2025 crowd are already telegraphing that they will not accept any outcome other than their own victory. It isn’t going to be pretty.

I worry when I hear things like this. A news reporter asked a group of voters in a focus group about Trump’s pronouncements that he will be a dictator on day one and that after this election we won’t have to vote anymore and all the other statements he has made that he will rule as an autocrat. The focus group’s consensus was that worries about losing our democracy are just hyperbole to “scare” people and are just Democrat’s campaign talking points. They concluded that as long as they could vote, we would have a democracy. Hmmmm. I suppose Russia really is a democracy along with the People’s Republic of China and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Not only do they vote but they even have the word “republic” in their country’s name!

What could go wrong?

The End Of A Peaceful World Order?

Posted: February 19, 2024 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

“No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.”

— Donald J. Trump at a campaign rally in Conway, South Carolina referring to another member of NATO threatened by a hypothetical Russian attack.

In recent days there have been both unserious and serious attacks on the stability of our national security policies and the international norms that have helped to stabilize the world order for nearly 75 years. The unserious attack is the foolishness surrounding the Republican majority in the House of Representatives impeachment (by one vote, on their second try) of Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas. According to the Articles of Impeachment Secretary Mayorkas “willfully and systematically failed to comply with immigration laws” and therefore “demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national and border security.” Three House Republicans voted against the impeachment and numerous prominent Senate Republicans considered the entire process to be a sham, including Senator Kevin Kramer (ND), a Trump ally, who called it “the worst, dumbest exercise and waste of time.” The House has passed nearly nothing else of significance during this session and recessed for a two week vacation after the impeachment vote without taking up important and substantive bills regarding our national security. By all objective accounts, this was purely a political stunt to satisfy the radical extremists in the Republican Party and to assuage Trump. Secretary Mayorkas will almost certainly be acquitted in the Senate, if they even hold a trial. (They may refer it to committee for investigation and never have it come forward.)

The serious attack is courtesy of Trump and his MAGA acolytes in the House. During his first term, Trump continually threatened to leave NATO. He is reported to have told the president of the European Commission in 2020 that “NATO is dead” and that the U.S. would “never” come to help Europe were it under attack. He reiterated his 2018 threat to quit NATO. His remarks in South Carolina continue to reflect his disdain for treaties and alliances as well as his ignorance on how they work.

Perhaps a little background will help. As we know, NATO was formed in 1949 to counter the threat to Europe from the Soviet Union. The original twelve members consisted of European and North American countries resolved to stop Soviet expansion in Europe. Today it consists of 31 countries — soon to be 32 when Sweden joins this year — allied in a mutual defense pact. NATO has taken on political and economic roles over the decades, in addition to its core as a military alliance. Despite the MAGA and Trump criticisms that many NATO countries do not pay their “dues,” NATO is not a club and the members do not pay dues. There are some cost sharing administrative expenses and enrichment funds but the reality — and what the MAGA crowd is talking about — is that each country pledged to spend at least 2% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on its own defense. Throughout its existence, not all nations met that obligation. Several past presidents pushed European nations to meet that goal. In 2014 under President Obama the organization agreed that countries not spending 2% of GDP would start increasing their defense budgets. Today, 18 nations meet or exceed (by the end of the year) the 2% goal. We must also be realistic about which countries can meet the requirement. Countries such as Luxembourg and Iceland with small populations and small defense forces are unlikely to ever meet that goal. It helps to know what you are talking about.

NATO is not some kind of protection racket where you “gotta” pay the U.S. or we won’t help you. “Nice little country you’ve got there. It would be a shame if something happened to it.”

The heart and soul of NATO is found in Article Five of the North Atlantic Treaty. The article requires every member of NATO to come to the aid of any other member subjected to an armed attack. Article Five has been invoked only once, by the U.S. after the attacks of 11 September 2001. Significant numbers of forces were deployed by eighteen NATO countries under NATO command in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. Several countries suffered killed and wounded in combat. They were there for us when we needed them. Without Article Five, the alliance has no teeth and becomes worthless. This is the heart of Trump’s declaration that he won’t help our allies if attacked.

This time, he took it a step further.

Trump went beyond his threat to standby and watch when other countries were attacked. He openly encouraged the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin to “do whatever the hell they want.” He invited Russia to attack a NATO ally. As a long time student of national security affairs, and in my career I worked these issues, I never could have imagined that a President of the United States would invite a foreign dictator to attack a democratic ally. Inconceivable. Yet, I have every reason to believe that he means it.

Some Republicans in the Congress are confident that he does not mean it, or at least that’s what they tell themselves. I am not sure why they say that, but here is the practical truth of it. In 2023 the National Defense Authorization Act included a provision that a president cannot withdraw from NATO without approval from the Senate or an Act of Congress. An elegant solution, heh? Not really. Trump, or someone like him, would not have to actually withdraw from NATO. As Commander-in-Chief he would only have to decide that the U.S. will not send or use military forces in support of the attacked country. The provision is only a feel good exercise with no practical aspect to it. I have no doubt that Trump could care less what a provision in the NDA says.

Moving beyond the promised future actions of a presidential candidate, there are practical ramifications right now. Besides signaling to Putin, Xi and Kim that they only have to wait out the current administration and hope for a Trump victory to do what they want, Trump’s MAGA supporters in the House are holding up aid to Ukraine, Taiwan, Israel and humanitarian relief in Gaza because he told them to do so. They bend their knee to Trump and he in turn bends his knee to Putin. Ukraine is suffering terrible losses. No one that knows what they are talking about thinks that Putin will stop in Ukraine. If Kyiv falls, others, primarily Poland and the Baltic States, will be in his sights. Without NATO to deter him, Putin will act. To him, the greatest tragedy of the 20th century was the break up of the USSR. He clearly espouses his desire to reconstitute it. The only thing in his way is NATO. And let’s be clear, many European nations have professional, effective, tough-as-nails military forces. But they would be no match for the Russians. Not because of their fighting ability — we have seen in Ukraine that the Russian Army and Navy are not the unbeatable foes they were made out to be — but because Russia is a large country with lots of people and resources to throw into the breach. They would eventually win by attrition as Napoleon and Hitler learned the hard way. This is what is happening in Ukraine. The Ukrainians have proven over the last two years that they are a formidable foe. But without NATO support — including from the U.S. — they will be attrited and defeated. Russia has already committed terrible atrocities against Ukrainian civilians. Putin is a convicted war criminal. Imagine the death and destruction when he unleashes his forces to wreak retribution against those that dared oppose him in an occupied Ukraine.

Speaker Mike Johnson (MAGA-LA) is an extraordinarily weak Speaker of the House who was thrown into a job he is ill-prepared to fill. Mr. Johnson takes his orders from Trump and Trump does not want to support Ukraine. He is a fanboy of Putin (one wonders why he prefers Putin over his own country, but that is a topic for another day). The Senate passed a bipartisan bill providing the desperately needed aid. The Speaker refuses to bring it to the House floor, even though all knowledgeable participants are convinced that it would pass on a bipartisan basis. Mr. Johnson claims we need to secure our border before providing aid to others, even as he refuses to bring a bill to the floor that was considered the best improvement to border security and immigration rules in decades. The hypocrisy is off the charts. Unfortunately, there is no shame anymore in the MAGA Republican Party, only loyalty to Trump.

Look. Let’s lay it on the line. Biden vs Trump is a referendum on the future of democracy in the United States and our future role in a rules based international society. Trump’s “America First” motto was originally the motto of the isolationists and Nazi supporters in the U.S. prior to World War II. Just like today, there were massive rallies, in the 1930s it was to promote fascism. In the U.S., German supporters formed the German American Bund as a cover to promote policies favorable to Nazi Germany. Tens of thousands of Americans joined. There were about 20 youth training camps to raise future fascists. In 1939 the organization held a rally in Madison Square Garden where over 20,000 people gathered to denounce “Jewish conspiracies” fomented by President Franklin Roosevelt and to support Nazi Germany. There are too many similarities to today for me to think that Trump is bluffing or just playing to the crowd. He means what he says.

Hitler vowed to invade Czechoslovakia in 1938. Desperate to avoid another world war, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain met in Munich with Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and French president Edouard Daladier and agreed to the fascist’s demands. He declared that he achieved “peace for our time.” He hoped that Hitler would be satisfied. We know the rest of that story. If we give in to Putin in Ukraine, we know the rest of this story as well.

Party Over Country

Posted: February 8, 2024 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“…former President Trump has become citizen Trump…”

–U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC circuit ruling rejecting Trump’s presidential immunity claim

Although the Court of Appeals categorically denied Trump’s claims of “absolute immunity” as a former president, a decision expected to be appealed to the Supreme Court, he continues to act as if he is above the law and continues to try and destroy our country for his own political and monetary gain. His latest power play is the trashing of a significant bipartisan bill put together by Senate, White House and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) negotiators that provides much needed immigration reforms, beefs up security on our southern border and sends crucial aid to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan and humanitarian assistance in war torn parts of the world. 

The 118 billion dollar Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, primarily negotiated by Senators James Lankford (R-OK), Chris Murphy (D-CONN) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), was touted as the best border security bill to come out of Congress in decades. It died a shameful death in just over 24 hours. Here is what that means.

In October 2023 President Joe Biden asked for supplemental appropriations to assist Ukraine in its existential war with Russia and to bolster Israel in their war with Hamas and to help Taiwan defend against Chinese aggression. The Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (MAGA-LA) flatly refused to consider any aid overseas without first taking meaningful steps to secure the border. Multiple Senate Republicans joined in to express their support for reforms on the border before acting on the request to aid Ukraine and the others. President Biden agreed and the Senate went to work to hammer out a bipartisan deal. After four months of nearly continuous work, and despite multiple attempts by MAGA supporters to undermine the act without even knowing what was in it, the negotiators unveiled the finished supplemental on Sunday night this week. Before it was fully read and digested, the leadership of the House declared it “DEAD on arrival in the House.” (The caps were in their actual statement. Hmmm. Someone else deals in all caps.) As Senator Murphy lamented, on Sunday night there were 20-25 Republican Senators that said they would support it and vote for it. By Monday night there were only four. What happened?

Trump happened.

Trump put out the word that anyone that voted for the supplemental act would be the target of his retribution. As a result, there was no vote in the House and a procedural vote in the Senate to move to debate over the bill failed. Before Monday night, a notable number of Senators from both parties considered this bill to be the best chance to enhance border security in decades. And then it was gone. Along with aid to Ukraine, a country desperate for supplies to counter the Russian invasion. There were no profiles in courage this week. To underscore the magnitude of the reversal, Republicans got nearly everything that they could hope for in a border bill. Frankly, I believe that they were shocked by how much they got. In past negotiations, Democrats had demanded a path to citizenship for Dreamers and others, but not in this bill. The Democrats agreed that there was a crisis on the border and were looking for concrete measures to improve the system. Additionally, many of the Democrats were focused on our commitments to our friends and allies in Europe and around the world believing that aid to counter Russia and China was paramount. They were willing to deal. 

Republicans could not take yes for an answer.

Why would Trump kill it? For several reasons. First, he does not really want to solve the crisis on the border. In many ways, it his identity as a demagogue and provides the fodder to rant and rave about the “others” “invading” our country. If the crisis is solved or even alleviated, he has nothing to run on. By arguing that he can get a better deal when he is president (he can’t — as proven by four years of his presidency) he can continue to argue that the country is being overrun and that it is the Democrats’ fault. Recall the other debacle that took place Tuesday night when the House tried to impeach Secretary of Homeland Defense Alejandro Mayorkas and failed. (They will keep trying until they succeed.) There was no Constitutional basis to do so. It was merely political theater to try and agitate about the border crisis. The very border crisis that they refuse to do anything about. Clearly, the MAGA Republicans and those too afraid to resist them are putting party over country. More specifically, they are putting one man over the needs of our nation. As the Circuit Court identified him, he is citizen Trump. He has no legal or moral authority to dictate anything to the Congress of the United States.

This leads to the other reasons why citizen Trump torpedoed the bipartisan bill. He did it to show that he can. This may be the most dangerous of all the reasons. He demonstrated that in or out of office, he controls the Republicans in the Congress and as a result, given that the Republicans have a majority in the House and very little can get accomplished in the Senate without a filibuster proof majority of Senators, he dictates what gets accomplished in the Congress by vetoing any progress. Trump is laying the groundwork for his autocratic rule in the future. 

Likewise, Trump is pro-Putin, pro-Xi and he sends love letters to Kim in North Korea. Aid to Ukraine would run counter to his support for Putin and Russia. Many of his MAGA supporters are likewise enamored of Putin and other “strong men” around the world. ”America First” means withdrawing from NATO and other alliances around the world. Trump is demonstrating to the world that the U.S. cannot be counted upon to meet its commitments and will turn away from our friends in need. Like it or not, without U.S. leadership, the forces of evil in the world have an ever increasing chance of prevailing. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is a prime example. It is a “pay me now or pay me later” proposition. Should Russia prevail in Ukraine, other nations are next on the list. But do not take my word for it, take a look at Finland and Sweden. Both nations rebuffed offers to join NATO for nearly 75 years. They know Russia. Since the invasion of Ukraine, Finland joined NATO and Sweden is in the process of doing so. They recognize the danger from an expansionist Russia. 

Add to the picture that Trump is pushing his acolytes to remove Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) from his leadership position in the Senate. Why? Because he deigned to work with Democrats on bipartisan bills. Trump is also pushing to remove Ronna McDaniel the current head of the Republican National Committee (RNC) because even though she has let Trump do pretty much whatever he wants, she is now considered not MAGA enough. Trump wants a puppet as the RNC chair so that he has absolute control over the political levers of the party. Additionally, he is already using his “rigged election” mantra in Indiana claiming that Nikki Haley, his only remaining opponent for the presidential nomination, is illegally on the primary ballot there. He wants her removed and if she is not, then obviously “they” are trying to steal the election. 

Put all of these pieces together and one can discern that citizen Trump, with no actual role in government, is building the will and the political infrastructure to do as he pleases in our country. His efforts are insidious but ever present. 

We are in for a bumpy and dangerous year.

Freedom

Posted: February 22, 2023 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , | Leave a comment

This week on the first anniversary of the Russian assault on Ukraine, President Joe Biden marked the occasion in two important ways. In an act of secrecy worthy of a spy thriller, he visited the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv to reiterate U.S. and NATO support of the Ukrainians in their fight to retain their democracy against a ruthless dictator. The next day, President Biden gave a major speech in Warsaw Poland celebrating the stand that democracies around the world are taking against Russia and vowing that their support will continue until Ukrainian democracy is secure.

One year ago, I am sure that Russian President Vladimir Putin thought that he would be standing in Mariinsky Palace, the ceremonial home of the Ukrainian president, rather than the President of the United States. Many others, whether or not they admit it now, thought the same thing one year ago. There was no way that Ukraine could stand up to the mighty Russian bear. And yet, they did, and they have, and they continue to do so. It must have seemed like the ultimate insult to Mr. Putin that President Biden strode the streets of Kyiv in broad daylight, even as air raid sirens blared during his stroll with Ukrainian President Zelensky. Neither president flinched.

President Biden’s visit lasted five hours after flying all night from Washington to Germany to Poland where he boarded a train for the ten hour trip to Kyiv. It was another ten hour train trip back to Poland after his visit. Not too bad considering his critics think that Mr. Biden is “too old” to continue as president. He seemed invigorated and on top of his game as he proudly stood by Mr. Zelensky’s side and declared “Ukraine stands! Democracy stands!” During his visit, Mr. Biden promised an additional 500 million dollars in military aid to Ukraine. The visit was symbolic, of course, but in many areas of diplomacy and international affairs, showing up is important. It indicates resolve and commitment. It has real meaning. It puts strength behind words that could have been spoken in the White House but that mean so much more when said in the streets of Kyiv.

Several historians pointed out that this is the first time an incumbent American president has been in a war zone and vulnerable to enemy fire since President Abraham Lincoln visited Fort Stevens on the outskirts of Washington D.C. on 12 July 1864. There, during the second day of an attack by Confederate soldiers, President Lincoln stood on a parapet of the fort to see what was happening and came under fire from enemy snipers. Thankfully, he was uninjured. While not trying to make President Biden’s visit comparable to President Lincoln’s, as he did not come under direct fire, it was still a remarkable act of courage personally and as a president. While other presidents have visited war zones before in Viet Nam, Afghanistan and elsewhere, they were visiting U.S troops in areas under U.S. control under very strict security protocols — often in the dark of night. Mr. Biden had no such protection from American forces on the ground which is why the impact of his visit was so powerful and meaningful to the Ukrainians and to our NATO allies and friends.

The following day, Mr. Biden gave a powerful speech in Warsaw. It was perhaps the best foreign policy speech of his presidency and was delivered forcefully and convincingly. In it, he vowed that Russia will “never” win in Ukraine and reiterated that the U.S. and NATO will stand stronger than ever in their support for Ukraine. He also directly refuted a claim made by Mr. Putin in a speech earlier in the day where Mr. Putin claimed that Russia was not attacking Ukraine but merely defending itself from an attack by NATO forces. All lies, as most of the world knows. As Mr. Biden said in his speech, “This war was never a necessity. It’s a tragedy. President Putin chose this war. Every day the war continues is his choice.” He also further emphasized the remarks made by Vice President Kamala Harris a few days before that the Russians are conducting “crimes against humanity without shame or compunction.” This is a statement that has meaning in the long run as it triggers international laws and treaties that will attempt to hold Mr. Putin and his flunkies accountable for the purposeful death and destruction the Russians are inflicting on innocent civilians.

Mr. Biden put into words what is at stake. Simply put, it is freedom. Not just for Ukraine but for the world. As he said in his speech:

Freedom. 

There is no sweeter word than freedom.  There is no nobler goal than freedom.  There is no higher aspiration than freedom.  Americans know that, and you know it.  And all that we do now must be done so our children and grandchildren will know it as well.

Freedom.

The enemy of the tyrant and the hope of the brave and the truth of the ages.

Freedom.

This is where the far right MAGA crowd in the U.S. House of Representatives misses the mark. They are very critical of our policy towards Ukraine and our willingness to support them in their fight against Russia. Some are open admirers of Mr. Putin and all that he stands for. I will resist slamming their ignorant statements, for in the end, most Americans understand that if we allow Russia to subjugate Ukraine, it will not end there. For the first time since World War II, a country, Russia, is openly saying that the old world order where nations do not subjugate other nations by unprovoked force, no longer applies. If we do not stop Mr. Putin in Ukraine, then the Baltic States, Poland, and other eastern European nations will be in line for Russian aggression. Mr. Putin has for years reiterated his belief, first stated in 2005, that the collapse of the Soviet Union and its empire “was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [20th] century.” Worse than World War I. Worse than World War II. He intends to restore that empire. It is his vision quest.

If he is not stopped in Ukraine, then nowhere is safe. Make no mistake, under President Biden if Russia attacks a NATO country, it is war. It is better to stop him in Ukraine than to allow that to happen. It is incredible that some right wing MAGA advocates do not know or understand history or the threat imposed by Russia.

There is another player on the world stage watching all of this. China. Be assured that President Xi Jinping is following events in Europe closely as he contemplates his own ambitions towards Taiwan. A year ago he would be among those that thought Ukraine had little chance of holding off the Russians and he likely assumed that NATO would not band together to support them. While China is willing to take the long view, he must now assess whether the Taiwanese will fight as relentlessly as the Ukrainians. He must also assess whether the rest of the world will come to Taiwan’s aid as they have in Ukraine. He must also assess whether his own military, in which no one currently in his Armed Forces has experienced full scale combat, is up to the test against the U.S. and other NATO countries and friends that have become combat hardened in over twenty years of wars in Asia.

It is not just about Ukraine. It is about fighting tyranny and autocrats the world over. Will democracies be up to the task? One year ago many autocrats around the world assessed the U.S. and NATO as weak and unwilling to stand up for their principles. Probably, that is a legacy from the previous administration. Now those autocrats know the answer.

Let’s make no mistake, however. The war in Ukraine will continue for a long time. Perhaps years. While the U.S. and NATO have been crucial to Ukraine’s success, the aid given so far mostly just keeps Ukraine from losing, rather than winning. The West must increase the lethality and range of the weapons and systems supplied to Ukraine. Without expanding our support, the war will continue to drag on and on. In the end, do not forget that Russia has a larger population, economy and military than Ukraine. A war of attrition is not good for Ukraine and that is how the war is slowly evolving. In some respects, it resembles the trench warfare days of World War I. If the West truly believes that this is the critical stand that democracies must take to prevent the spread of dictatorships, then it is worth giving the Ukrainians the weapons they need, including offensive capabilities.

As the well worn phrase explains, “freedom isn’t free.”

Ukraine (Still) Has Not Perished

Posted: October 12, 2022 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , | 1 Comment

In English, the Ukrainian national anthem is known as “Ukraine Has Not Perished.” Indeed, it has not perished, even as the unprovoked Russian invasion of its territory continues. The initial invasion took place in February 2014 and the Russians invaded again in February 2022. Over seven months ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin went all in on his long-standing desire to annex all of Ukraine, not just Crimea or the eastern part known as the Donbas. After seven long months of warfare, massive casualties continue to mount on both sides of the conflict. Recently, however, the Ukrainians have shown themselves to be the superior force on the ground — both in terms of their fighting ability and in terms of their will to destroy the Russian troops invading their country. There does not appear to be any comparable will to fight in any of the Russian units engaged in combat and thus the tide is starting to slowly turn in the Ukrainians’ favor.

Perhaps surprisingly so, the Ukrainian successes create an ever more dangerous situation. The last few weeks have shown that President Putin is not willing to back off of his stated goal to crush the Ukrainian people, overthrow its government, and install a puppet regime that is controlled by Moscow. Indeed, he is doubling down despite his gross miscalculation that he could take Ukraine in a matter of days with a quick strike into Kyiv. To show his resolve to control Ukraine, earlier this month he formally annexed the regions of Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia in eastern Ukraine. That part of the country is where the fighting on the ground continues and the Russian and pro-Russian forces are concentrated there. The annexation was announced despite one important thing — the Russians do not control all of that territory. In fact, Ukrainian forces have the Russians in retreat in several parts of the annexed areas. This is where things get dicey.

President Putin declared that those four regions were now a part of Russia proper (just as he claimed Crimea in 2014) and that an attack on them would be considered an attack on the homeland. In a late September speech, President Putin declared that he was willing to use nuclear weapons to defend Russia’s “territorial integrity.” Since then he has reiterated that he is willing to use “all means necessary” to protect the newly acquired territory, which is a euphemism for threatening to use Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) to prevent Ukraine from retaking their own territory. (WMD are chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.) Bluff? Bluster? Empty threats? Warning? No one is sure, and that is the problem. Mr. Putin backed himself into a corner that now threatens the stability of Russia as a country and threatens his own iron grip on the population. He considers the current state of affairs to be “an existential threat” to Russia and to himself. Is it possible that if he sees his own safety and power threatened that he would lash out? Possibly, but let’s look a little closer.

The past few days have given us some ideas as to how Mr. Putin might respond to an expanded war. When the twelve mile long Kerch Strait Bridge from Crimea to Russia was partially damaged on Sunday, the Russians retaliated by launching massive air strikes using approximately one hundred cruise missiles and suicide drones in one morning to attack Ukrainian infrastructure and civilian neighborhoods. (So far, no one has claimed responsibility for the attack on the bridge, but Russia assumes it was Ukrainian special forces.) The Russian supply of such weapons is not endless, but air strikes are probably the primary method that the Russians will use to continue to disrupt daily life in Ukraine and to inflict serious damage. The intent is to break the will of the civilian population and force the Ukrainian government to seek a settlement of some kind. It will not work.

The Russian style of warfare is based on raw brutality. Massive numbers of people and weapons are used against every aspect of an opponent’s military and civilian systems, capabilities, support and people. The term “collateral damage” does not exist for Russia. Killing civilians and destroying playgrounds, hospitals, apartment buildings, and any other area of a city is the point. Torture is a tool to be used. Indiscriminate bombing is a tool to be used. Everything is on the table. If brutality is the point, then that adds credibility to any threat to use WMD. So does that include nuclear weapons?

In my opinion, no. Not because Mr. Putin considers them to be off the table. Rather, so far, he calculates that he has other means at his disposal to achieve his war aims. In my many years in the military, I never seriously believed that we, or anyone else, would use nuclear weapons. The deterrent impact of sufficient numbers of weapons on both sides made it highly improbable. But now, for the first time in my adult life (I was around for the Cuban Missile Crisis, but that is a different situation), the chances are not zero. I still think that the probability of Mr. Putin using a nuclear weapon, even as a “demonstration,” is incredibly low, but no one knows for certain what he may be capable of doing. Probably more likely is the use of chemical weapons. The Russians used them, or at least abetted their use, in Syria. It may be as the Russian army withdraws from yet another town or village that the incoming Ukrainian forces may be subject to a chemical attack. If so, it is likely to be on a small scale and intended to be a deterrent to a continuing Ukrainian offensive and a warning to the rest of the world that the Russians are not bluffing when they threaten to defend themselves using “any means necessary.”

More likely, the Russians will expand their use of asymmetric attacks such as cyberwarfare, economic warfare such as limiting or stopping the export of oil or natural gas, or halting the shipment of goods (especially grain) from the Black Sea. A clear sign of such efforts occurred in late September this year when Swedish and Danish sensors detected explosions in the Baltic Sea. It was soon discovered that the Nord Stream pipelines running from Russia to Europe were experiencing massive leaks, thus stopping the flow of natural gas to Europe. To date, there is no official blame or explanation for the leaks. It is widely believed, however, that Russian special forces are to blame. The Russians, and other nations including the United States, have the capability to operate from submarines near the seabed to disrupt the wide array of modern infrastructure that crosses great bodies of water such as gas and oil lines and fiber optic cables. As winter approaches, Mr. Putin may be pushing European nations, especially Germany, to give up their support of Ukraine by disrupting their economies and signaling that other elements of infrastructure could be at risk if their support to Ukraine continues. It may be a long, cold winter in much of Europe. In the short run, it actually hurts Russia as the gas it sells to Europe is a major element of support to the Russian economy. The side effect is to again signal that Mr. Putin is willing to do “anything,” even if it hurts his own people, to achieve his goals. I would expect to see more of these moves from the Russians, as long as they can plausibly (or in some cases implausibly) deny their involvement.

The war in Ukraine will drag on for months to come, possibly years. Mr. Putin knows that he is in trouble on the ground and his army is being destroyed. Recent attempts to mobilize 300,000 additional troops to fight in the war have gone badly. Russian men are leaving the country in droves. Reportedly, over 200,000 have fled to Kazakhstan alone. Another 100,000 are said to have left for other countries surrounding Russia in order to avoid conscription. Even if he raises an additional 300,000 troops, they will be poorly trained and equipped based on what we see with his allegedly “elite” forces that have already been decimated on the battlefield. They will only be cannon fodder, which is yet another indicator that the Russian army and Mr. Putin in particular have no concerns about the lives and well-being of their soldiers or their civilians. It is worth noting that Mr. Putin’s retaliatory strikes this week and his threats to use “any means necessary” are not aimed at the Ukrainian soldiers on the front. Rather, they are all aimed at the Ukrainian civilian population. It is terrifying for them, but as has happened throughout history, his terror tactics only increase the resolve of those under attack.

Mr. Putin has many options left in his bag of tricks. However, even he must recognize that he does not want to go toe-to-toe with NATO. He must also recognize that as his attacks on Ukrainian cities escalates, he runs the risk of NATO and other friendly nations increasing the number and sophistication of the weapons they are sending to Ukraine.

It is hard to know how this conflict ends, but it is increasingly less likely that there will be a negotiated settlement.

Never Again!

Posted: April 19, 2022 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , | 4 Comments

In what should be more than a war of words, the term “genocide” is being tossed around in the wake of the fighting during Putin’s War. Russian President Vladimir Putin used the term prior to his invasion of Ukraine, claiming that the Ukrainians were committing genocide against the Russian speaking population of Donbas in the eastern part of Ukraine. Indeed, it is part of his disinformation campaign to justify his invasion and he connects it to his declaration that the Ukrainian government is run by “Nazis.” There is a long history of this sort of talk from Mr. Putin. In short, the Soviet Union’s war against Nazi Germany in World War II is glorified in Russian history beyond any level that we in the United States may understand. He is trying to build support for his war by tying it to the success of the Soviet army against the Nazis. Forgotten in that telling, of course, is that in 1939 the Soviet Union was allied with Germany via a non-aggression pact and they divided Poland between them. Also conveniently forgotten is that in April and May of 1940 the Soviets executed about 22,000 Polish military officers and intelligentsia in the Katyn forest.

In 2022 we face a difficult situation. President Joe Biden called Mr. Putin a “war criminal” for the atrocities taking place in Ukrainian areas occupied or under siege by Russian troops. At last count, Ukrainian government prosecutors were investigating about 5,800 cases of war crimes and crimes against humanity, with more uncovered everyday. These are facts which, unfortunately, many of us can see for ourselves each night on the national news. Last week Mr. Biden took it a step further during an event in Iowa by saying that Mr. Putin is “a dictator that commits genocide.” Later, he doubled down on his statement saying, “Yes. I called it genocide. It’s become clearer and clearer that Putin is trying to wipe out the idea of being Ukrainian.” Which has a basis in fact, as Mr. Putin repeatedly claims that Ukraine should cease to exist as a sovereign nation. He believes it should be Russian with only Russian speakers living there.

War crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide are all legal terms under international law. Each is the result of ever more horrifying actions of one people against others. Genocide, however, has usually been reserved for the most heinous of crimes and gives another level of importance to the events in Ukraine. As if they were not already of utmost importance. The moral stakes are as high as they can be.

The 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (often called the Genocide Convention) codified the United Nations resolution of 1946 that made genocide a crime under international law. In Article II, the Convention document defines genocide as meaning “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group as such: Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

I will leave it to the international law experts to define what “in whole or in part” means, but it would seem that actions by one nation attempting to eliminate another does not have to succeed in entirely wiping them out. Merely trying to do so is a crime. In fact, the Convention states that conspiracy or incitement to commit genocide is itself a crime. Certainly it is easy from what we know in open source reporting that the Russians have violated at least four of the five genocidal actions under the Convention.

Sadly, whether brought up on war crime charges or for genocide, it is unlikely that Mr. Putin or any of those in his inner circle or those carrying out his orders will be brought to trial. Under the Convention the investigation and trial of such crimes are to be undertaken by the nation in which they occurred or in international court.

The real issue here is a moral one. It raises new questions about how NATO should support Ukraine and how this conflict will end. If we in the West truly believe in the slogan “Never Again!” — meaning we will never again sit by and watch the slaughter of thousands or millions of our fellow human beings as occurred in the Nazi death camps — then now is the time to step up. This is a major test of the world order and a test that will have consequences for decades to come. Russians are deliberately torturing, killing, beheading, raping, and desecrating civilians in Ukraine. I’ll repeat that. Deliberately. Even though I cannot understand how human beings can be so cruel to others — and yes, I know my history from around the world including here in the U.S. — it is none-the-less happening. It is an instrument of planned terror. It also provides a look into the psyche of the average Russian. Only by dehumanizing an opponent — thinking of them as “scum” (Putin’s word) and other than human — can people be so cruel.

These actions also impact how the war will end. How can Ukraine reach a negotiated settlement with Russia if the Russians are attempting to wipe out the very meaning of what it means to be Ukrainian? How can the West broker a settlement with a country accused of genocide? Is anything short of a complete defeat of Russia rewarding their genocidal policy? Does giving up Ukrainian territory — rewarding Russia for committing genocide — even make sense? Such questions have a significant impact on the course of the war, who gets involved, and its outcome.

My thoughts on NATO and with that, U.S. support to Ukraine have evolved over the course of the last few weeks. I think we need to go all in. Not with troops in Ukraine — at least not yet — but with every offensive and defensive weapon we can reasonably give to Ukraine. I am sure that we are providing valuable intelligence data to the Ukrainians (surprise Russian flagship Moskva!) to help them with their targeting but we should take that a step further to allow them to attack into Russian territory to hit supply, fuel and military targets. Continue to put our best military minds to work with imaginative, but deniable, actions that hinder the Russian military. Sanctions are the public face of such efforts — and they are beginning to work — but there is much more to do. Our covert capabilities are excellent. There is more to do without directly fighting the Russians.

The moral imperative is there now. I have come to understand what Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is saying about how this is a fight for the future of western democracies. It may sound like hyperbole, or over-dramatization on their part, but as we see the ruthless brutality of the Russians such statements take on more meaning. Importantly, remember why Mr. Putin started this war. Once the propaganda is removed it is for one major reason. He saw a direct challenge to his totalitarian regime. If Ukraine — where many Russians have family members as do Ukrainians in Russia — becomes a full fledged western democracy sitting fully on his border, he will soon have internal domestic problems as more and more Russians clamor for a similar assimilation into Europe. As it is, many of his troops are seeing a way of life that they could not imagine. In addition to the subjugation of a nation, there is a reason Russian troops are carrying away washing machines, laptops, televisions and other consumer goods. They cannot get them in many parts of Russia and certainly, many average Russians cannot afford them.

Mr. Putin is desperate to maintain his way of life and to rule Russia with an iron fist. That is why Ukraine is such a threat. He must destroy it in order to show that the western democracies of NATO cannot succeed in protecting it, therefore no nation should think that democracy is a way of governing that succeeds. How far he is willing to go in this scorched earth policy we can only guess. This is the first time in my experience that sober, knowledgeable people are talking about the use of nuclear weapons. Many surmise that Mr. Putin thinks such weapons are a viable option if needed to succeed in Ukraine. That should give all of us pause and emphasize once again how serious this war is and how much more serious it can become.

We get easily distracted by such things as “The Slap” at the Academy Awards show, or whether we now have to wear masks on airplanes. Life goes on, yes, but the stakes are higher in Ukraine than many believe. Five million people to date have left Ukraine for other countries. This in its self is a humanitarian crisis. It is also part of the Russian plan to destabilize western Europe by disrupting the ability of democratic governments to care for their own people and the refugees.

Genocide is underway. There is a massive humanitarian crisis underway. Terror is raining down on the civilians in many Ukrainian cities, killing tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children. Russia is reportedly deporting women and children from occupied areas to camps in Russia. More atrocities will be uncovered. Mr. Putin is trying to destroy the ideals of western democracy. The list will grow longer.

If we mean “Never Again!” we need to act on it.

What To Do In Ukraine?

Posted: March 21, 2022 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: | 1 Comment

As we approach the end of four weeks of fighting in Ukraine (or more accurately, 8 years, three weeks and three days since the first Russian invasion), pundits, analysts and government officials from around the world are surprised at the continued and valiant resistance from the Ukrainian military and the resilience of its civilian population. It is genuinely inspiring.

Most of those observers are equally surprised (including me) at the utter incompetence of the Russian military. Make no mistake, the Russians can overwhelm the Ukrainians with sheer numbers of troops and weapons, but they have shown a shocking lack of understanding about combined arms attack (integrating combat air, sea, and land forces in a concentrated and mutually supportive way), basic tactical operations, logistics and combat leadership. They are not the modern, effective military machine that Russian President Vladimir Putin thought he spent the last twenty years and billions of dollars building. It appears that they have a limited number of “smart” weapons to precisely hit military targets and have thus used ballistic missiles and “dumb” bombs to terrorize the civilian populations of major cities. Likewise, their tactical aircraft are mostly grounded since the early days of the invasion because they have not gained air supremacy (Ukrainian air defenses have destroyed a large number of low flying aircraft) and the Russians are afraid of losing aircraft and pilots in unsuccessful attacks. Without low level tactical aircraft coordinating with armored columns, the tanks and personnel carriers are left in the open to be ambushed by Ukrainians armed with anti-tank missiles and other weapons.

All of this means between 7,000 (US estimates) and 14,000 (Ukrainian estimates) dead Russian soldiers. Probably there are at least twice that number wounded or captured. That is a lot given the preponderance of force the Russians should have and that the war is only about four weeks old. The Russian military is not the mighty twenty-first century fighting machine that they pretended to be.

That is of only small consolation to the Ukrainians under attack. In fact, it may actually be to their detriment. As the battle lines become more static and Mr. Putin more frustrated, he may increase the attacks on non-military targets to terrorize civilians and break the will of the government to continue to resist. It could lead to more casualties over the long run than a quick, effective strike might have caused.

The scenes are heartbreaking and the cry to help the Ukrainians is getting louder and more insistent. So what should the West do?

Just as nearly everyone overestimated the Russians’ strength, nearly as many people underestimated the ability of NATO to stand together. After the “former guy” nearly destroyed NATO, Mr. Putin calculated that the alliance would not band together against him. He was wrong. The Biden Administration has done a remarkable job in bringing all thirty member countries into a united front to work to isolate Russia and inhibit their ability to fight Putin’s War. Beyond NATO, the Biden Administration has lined up most of our friends and allies around the world to impose sanctions on Russia and to put their economy in extremis. No one thought it possible even three months ago. It is the result of basic hard work, diplomacy and the world’s desire to see the United States as the strong leader needed to bring others into the fold.

Is it enough? Only time and patience will tell. Most likely it will make Russia a pariah for years, if not generations, to come. Except for its nuclear weapons (admittedly, a major element), Russia is a third rate country. Its fate as such will be sealed for a long time to come. Unfortunately, none of that helps the Ukrainians today,

President Biden has the unenviable task of walking the fine line of keeping NATO together, giving lethal and humanitarian aid to Ukraine, and not instigating World War III. His Republican critics in Congress and the Senate have criticized his efforts. While legitimate policy discussions are warranted, many Republicans are pushing to “do more” without much specification as to what. And, oh yeah, the recent omnibus spending bill that President Biden signed into law last week had $13.6 billion in aid to Ukraine. Thirty-one Republican Senators voted against it, including many of those most vociferous about the president needing to do more. In addition, other Republicans are from the Putin Wing of the party and are saying unbelievable things. The words spewing from their lips continue to support Mr. Putin and they refer to the Ukrainian president as a “thug.” They and their propaganda wing of a certain cable channel use Putin talking points verbatim in their commentary and are despicable (as a result, they are a part of daily news broadcasts in Russia showing that the “American people” support the Russian “Special Military Operation”).

Talk of a “no fly zone” is just that, talk. Not every American understands what a no fly zone means, but most of those in the Senate pushing for one do know. It would mean declaring war on Belarus and Russia. This is not Iraq. When they talk of a no fly zone they mean stopping aircraft, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. To do that would mean destroying the bases ashore and the ships at sea that are launching the weapons, eliminating Russian anti-air defense missile launchers and shooting down Russian aircraft. Most of those are on Russian soil. The ships at sea fly Russian flags. It would be a direct attack on Russia itself. That would be World War III. If the Senate wants to do that, they should use their Constitutional powers and declare war on Russia. They won’t do that, of course. The Congress long ago abdicated their responsibilities regarding war. Their real purpose is to use the continued suffering of the Ukrainian people as a domestic political weapon against the president.

Everyone should also remember that the the leader of the Republican Party was impeached for withholding military aid to Ukraine for his own political gain. All Republican Senators voted not to remove him from office save one (Senator Mitt Romney of Utah). He also threatened to withdraw from NATO and did everything in his power to weaken the alliance — to Mr. Putin’s advantage. Please do not tell me that you now really care.

There are some additional actions that the president can take that should be done quickly. So far, Mr. Putin is setting all of the “red lines.” Those are the actions he says will escalate the conflict and he even cavalierly reminds the world of his nuclear arsenal. President Biden should be setting red lines for the Russians, something that has not yet really happened. Put Mr. Putin on notice that we are not afraid of his hollow Army and will not allow him to continue to act recklessly.

First on the list should be chemical weapons. Mr. Putin and a major personality on a Fox cable channel are spreading the false narrative that the U.S. has secretly been helping Ukraine build chemical and biological weapons. This is a bald face lie. Unfortunately, it is entirely possible that Mr. Putin will conduct a chemical or biological attack on a major Ukrainian city as he gets ever more frustrated by Ukrainian military resistance. He will then blame the attack on the U.S. and Ukraine. The Biden Administration has been working overtime to debunk this abominable lie. They should go further and make it clear (not vague statements) that any use of chemical weapons will be met with a harsh military response. The what and where are our choice, but their will be a military response.

Likewise, Mr. Biden and our NATO allies have repeatedly assured the world that they will not give up a single square inch of NATO territory to a Russian attack. This also needs to be clarified. Mr. Putin has repeatedly stated that the resupply of Ukrainian forces with weapons killing Russians is an act of war. He stated that resupply lines and bases are legitimate military targets. It is easy to envision a scenario where Mr. Putin tests NATO resolve. A single cruise missile, for instance, that hits a supply warehouse just across the border in Poland. No territory taken, but it was clearly an attack on NATO. Would we go to war over a single missile or bomb, especially if no one was killed? It should be clearly stated that the West will not tolerate any kind of attack, regardless of scope. It is easy to sense that Mr. Putin might try to pull something to embarrass the West or to test the “how much is too much” theory of tolerance.

It is hard to imagine a modern European city under attack by the Russians. It is even harder to watch the gut wrenching videos on TV and to hear the horrible stories from survivors. Most of us want to do something concrete to help them out, especially with a superior force represented by NATO that is not coming to their aid to stop the bombing. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy argues that those worried in the West that current events may lead to World War III are naive. He and others believe World War III has already begun. It is only a matter of time before NATO is involved and meanwhile many hundreds or thousands of people are losing their lives waiting for the West to act. He may be right.

As we all know, we cannot predict the future even if some things seem inevitable. Putin’s War is going to become a long drawn out affair with many, many casualties on both sides and the resultant destruction of a modern European country. The impact will be felt world-wide as oil and agricultural prices increase because of the loss of Russian and Ukrainian exports. It will get even more ugly.

Our leaders need to do everything in their power to end this needless slaughter. If it was easy, we would have ended it already. The western democracies need to lead the way and to keep up the pressure.

Ukraine Has Not Yet Perished

Posted: February 26, 2022 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , | 1 Comment

Ukraine has not yet perished, nor its glory and freedom,

Luck will still smile on us brother Ukrainians.

Our enemies will die, as the dew does on the sunshine,

and we too, brothers, will live happily in our land.

We’ll not spare either our souls or bodies to get freedom

and we’ll prove that we are brothers of Kozak kin.

— English translation of the Ukrainian National Anthem adopted in 1992.

Roughly seventy-two hours ago, the Russian military attacked and invaded Ukraine from the air, land and sea. It was expected that the Russians would swiftly roll over the Ukrainian countryside and capture key cities, especially the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv. So far, that is not happening. The Ukrainian military is fighting hard and inflicting severe casualties on the Russian invaders. Although accurate information is difficult to come by, especially since Russia has released no casualty figures, the Ukrainians are believed to have captured, killed or wounded thousands of Russians. At the same time, the Ukrainian government is mobilizing the population, arming them — over 18,000 weapons were issued to civilians in Kyiv alone — and teaching them how to make Molotov cocktails (gas filled bottles with a fuse thrown at vehicles — ironically named after a Soviet era Foreign Minister) and other improvised explosive devices (IEDs). None-the-less, the world does not expect Ukraine to defeat Russia or even to hold them off forever. Ukraine is getting moral support and supplies, but under the current conditions, there is no expectation that outside forces will come to their support by fighting inside Ukraine. Instead, countries around the world are imposing the “Mother of All Sanctions” on Russia. Realistically, this will not stop Russian President Vladimir Putin from destroying Ukraine, but it will make it much more painful for his country’s citizens than they may be prepared to experience.

The biggest concern to the rest of Europe and to the United States is that purposefully, or through an accident, the war will spread outside of Ukraine. In particular, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are worried that Mr. Putin will take the opportunity to reimpose the outlines of the former Soviet Union. Likewise, Romania is concerned about the integrity of its border. All are NATO countries. (Norway is also a member of NATO and borders Russia, but has fewer concerns about an attack.) I am neither a psychologist nor a psychiatrist but the speeches that Mr. Putin has given the last few days are bordering on the psychopathic. He sounds delusional, fundamentally unsound, and oblivious to any criticism inside or outside of his inner circle. In short, he sounds like a madman, even insinuating that anyone that thwarts his plans could be subject to a nuclear attack. Last Thursday he referred to the fact that “Russia remains one of the most powerful nuclear states” and went on to say that “there should be no doubt for anyone that any potential aggressor will face defeat and ominous consequences should it directly attack our country.”

As the fighting continues, for the first time in NATO history in response to war on the European continent, the NATO Response Force (NRF) is being activated. The NRF includes 40,000 military personnel from countries throughout NATO, and in past exercises included forces from non-NATO members Finland and Sweden — both of which border Russia. Their governments are now considering joining NATO in response to the Russian aggression in Ukraine. The force includes aircraft and naval forces in addition to land troops. The president order the deployment of about 7,000 more troops from the United States for the NRF, which is in addition to the thousands already deployed from home in response to Russia’s attack.

What are the chances of war spilling over into other areas of Europe? As I often do, let’s take a look at history to see if there are any parallels. There are two that jump out in my mind. One is the events leading up to World War II. The other is the Cuban Missile Crisis. (I am of the generation that in elementary school, we practiced hiding under our desks or assembling in the hallways should there be a nuclear attack. No joke. When we assembled in the hallways, we would press up against the walls in two rows. I always wondered about the kids in the outer row who in my mind would take the majority of the blow from an explosion. Of course, we were too young to appreciate that none of us had a chance in the case of an actual attack.)

The Cuban Missile Crisis reflects the dangers of miscalculation and sheer brinksmanship between two nuclear powers. We are not there, but a chance encounter could put us into this category.

So far, this is a conventional war so let’s use the run-up to World War II.

  • Following the end of World War I, the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 formally ended hostilities and completely reshaped the geographic boundaries of many central and eastern European nations, in some cases creating or recreating nations that had “disappeared.” CHECK. Following the dissolution of the former Soviet Union, newly independent countries emerged such as the Baltic States and Ukraine. Mr. Putin calls this the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” and is the basis for his claim that Ukraine does not exist as an independent country.
  • In 1938 Germany annexed the Sudetenland (part of Czechoslovakia) as a result of the Munich Agreement between Germany, United Kingdom, France and Italy to bring “peace in our time.” CHECK. In 2014 Russia annexed Crimea, part of the territory of Ukraine. The world scolded Russia but made no meaningful effort to stop or reverse the first such annexation in Europe of one country’s territory by another using force since World War II.
  • Throughout the spring and summer of 1939 Germany annexed parts of countries throughout central and eastern Europe claiming that that they were ethnically, culturally, and traditionally a part of Germany. CHECK. Mr. Putin claims that Ukraine is actually part of Russia and points to the large number of ethnic, cultural and linguistic similarities between the two countries. He claims that he must move into Ukraine to protect Russians.
  • On 23 August 1939, Germany and the Soviet Union signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty providing for a secret plan for the two countries to divide Poland and “giving” the Baltic States and Finland to the Soviet Union. CHECK. Prior to the Beijing Olympics this year, Mr. Putin and China’s President XI Jinping met. Although the details of any agreement is not known publicly, it is assumed that some sort of deal was reached that at a minimum, China would not interfere with Russia’s ambitions in Europe.
  • On 1 September 1939 Germany invaded Poland. France and the United Kingdom had promised to protect the territorial integrity of Poland. World War II began. CHECK? No guarantees were given to Ukraine that its territorial integrity would be protected by NATO or any country. However, NATO is implementing the NRF to protect NATO states from Russian aggression. NATO and non-NATO nations are supplying Ukraine with significant weapons and materiel to fight the Russians. To keep those supply lines open under the current conditions could easily result in a Russian attack on the supply lines into Ukraine.
  • In September 1940 the America First Committee was formed to pressure Congress to keep the United States out of foreign wars. Although its aim was to promote American isolationism, it was also antisemitic and largely pro-fascist. Charles Lindbergh (yes, that Charles Lindbergh) was the face of the organization that eventually reached about 800,000 dues paying members in 450 chapters around the country. The goal was to put, surprise, America First by not getting involved in World War II and by protecting “American” culture, which did not, in their view, include taking in immigrant Jews from Europe. The committee disbanded on 10 December 1941. CHECK. Our own American useful idiots for Russian propaganda want to put America First and raise many of the same questions that the original brand raised. DJ Trump, M. Pompeo, T. Carlson, and many others in the MAGA crowd question why we don’t support Russia (after all, they are just protecting their borders) or openly admire Mr. Putin (“genius”, “savvy”, “talented”, “enormous respect”, “capable statesman”, etc.) Indeed, Russian state television is running verbatim clips of a certain Fox evening celebrity defending Mr. Putin and asking “Why do I hate Putin so much? Has Putin ever called me a racist? Has he threatened to get me fired for disagreeing with him? So why does permanent Washington hate him so much?” (There’s more but I can’t stomach any more of this unpatriotic nonsense.)

There are many parallels. There are areas where there are no parallels. The point is that history often has serious lessons to be learned. I have no idea if the war in Ukraine will spread, but I think that every American should be paying attention to it because there are indications and warnings that it could, in fact, spread to a NATO country and then the world is at war. Even without war, there will be hardship in the United States. Nowhere near the hardship the Ukrainians are going through, or even the families of those young Russians sent out to die for Putin, but the American populace should be ready for economic sacrifice as the world’s economy is impacted by sanctions on Russia and their reciprocal actions. We in the United States have not really had to sacrifice in any real way in a long time. The “Greatest Generation” knew sacrifice. We do not. Shoot. We as a nation could not even be bothered to wear a mask during the greatest pandemic in the world in a hundred years without whining about it and claiming that health professionals were fascists and dictators. No wonder Mr. Putin and those like him think he can get away with an unprovoked attack on a neighbor.

I hope that President Biden and his administration do a better job explaining to our fellow citizens why it is important to help Ukraine defeat Russian aggression. We have seen time and time again that ruthless dictators are never satisfied. Mr. Putin’s stated objective is to restore the Russian empire and to regroup those nations that were once Soviet Republics. Like so many despots and autocrats, he is telling us what he plans to do. Believe him.

I am gobsmacked that many Americans do not know that Russia is a dictatorship and Ukraine is a real, no kidding, democracy. The Ukrainians have some problems. They are working on those issues. So, when did we stop supporting democracy in order to cheer on a dictator? A dictator that works aggressively to undermine everything that we stand for in this country? I really do not get it.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainians hunker down in a real fight to the death. The very survival of their country is at stake.

“Ukraine has not yet perished.”

Ukraine

Posted: February 19, 2022 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , | Leave a comment

As I write this piece, the world is on the brink of the biggest combat operations in Europe since World War II. Approximately 190,000 Russian troops threaten Ukraine’s borders on three sides supported by air and naval units in position to attack targets inside Ukraine. In military intelligence terms, all of the Indicators and Warnings (I&W) point to an invasion within days or even hours. Most telling is that the Russians have moved perishables, such as blood and plasma supplies, to positions near the border. Those types of logistics cannot sit in storage at the front for long.

Yesterday President Biden made a rare revelation in a speech to the nation addressing the impending crisis. When asked if Russian President Vladimir Putin had decided on his course of action, the president responded, “As of this moment, I am convinced he’s made the decision.” By that, he meant that Mr. Putin had decided to invade. When asked how he could know, he responded that the U.S. has a “significant intelligence capability.” This is important on several levels. One is that he is telling the world that the full weight of American capabilities indicates that the attack will happen and we should be prepared. On another level he is giving Mr. Putin an indication of our skill and capability in using our intelligence assets to keep a much closer eye on him and his activities than he might know. Finally, if we have this level of granularity into the Kremlin’s thinking, we may yet deter him from taking military action.

Personally, I have thought for quite awhile that the Russians would attack Ukraine. The only questions were when, and how strongly. He is going to do it. Mr. Putin clearly stated on numerous occasions that he considers Ukraine to be part of Russia. He will not be deterred. How far he goes depends on the Ukrainians. Mr. Putin’s goal is to depose the current Ukrainian government and to replace them with one that is more “friendly” to Russia. How far he goes militarily most likely will depend on the depth and degree of resistance from the Ukrainians and whether the current government stays in place.

This afternoon the artillery and Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) attacks from the separatist regions of Ukraine have dramatically increased. At the same time, they are evacuating civilians from cities in the Donbas region, specifically the Donetsk People’s Republic — one of the break away regions in southeastern Ukraine — to Russia. The Russians and their proxies in the occupied region are trying to provoke a response from the Ukrainians as a pretext to attack. So far, the Ukrainian military has exercised remarkable restraint by not taking the bait. As the Biden Administration has warned over the last several weeks, there is likely to be a major “false flag” incident (Russian agents attack their own people, or buildings or otherwise make it look like an atrocity occurred) to further the lie that Ukraine is the instigator of hostilities. There are numerous misinformation campaigns underway on the internet claiming that the Ukrainians are conducting genocide against the separatists or that chemical weapons attacks have occurred there. It is likely that some major manufactured incident will give the Russians their excuse to invade.

The Biden Administration has put steel into the spine of our NATO and EU allies. After weeks of diligent diplomatic efforts, the vast majority of the world’s leaders are condemning the impending attack and are onboard with sanctions aimed at crippling the Russian economy and going after Mr. Putin and his pals directly. Questions remain as to whether those sanctions should be used before or after the invasion. Many diplomats argue that invoking sanctions now may give Mr. Putin an excuse to attack. Others, such as Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelensky argue that they should be put in play immediately. At a security summit in Munich today, Mr. Zelensky addressed the assembled diplomats, including Vice President Kamala Harris, and bitterly chastised the western powers for waiting. He argued that sanctions need to be implemented now, not after the attack when Ukraine’s economy will have collapsed and “parts of our country will be occupied.”

Further, Mr. Zelensky decried the absence of support promised in a 1994 agreement known as the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. Put together by the United States, United Kingdom, and the Russian Federation, the Memorandum gave security assurances to Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan against threats or use of force to change the territorial integrity or political independence of those states in return for their relinquishing all nuclear weapons. Following the break up of the Soviet Union, those three countries had large stockpiles of former Soviet nuclear weapons. Indeed, in 1994 Ukraine had the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal. While the Russians retained operational control of the weapons due to controls required to utilize them, the Ukrainians had physical control of them. Arms control experts around the world worried about those three states’ ability to protect the weapons from falling into the wrong hands, especially terrorist hands. Mr. Zelensky today pointed out that in 2014 Ukraine got no help from anyone when Russia invaded and annexed Crimea. He wants it now.

Post World War II history teaches us that our enemies, competitors and adversaries often grossly under estimate American resolve. They view our very public domestic political fights as signs that we are distracted or weak. Currently, the incorrect view that we “ran away” in Afghanistan solidified the narrative that the U.S. was no longer a player on the world stage. Wrong. Over the last year, the Biden Administration worked hard to repair the damage done by the former guy to our relationships with our allies and especially within NATO. In my view, Mr. Putin did not expect the strong, and most importantly, unified stand that the West is taking to support Ukraine. He miscalculated. The effort to deter him permanently will probably fail, but it appears he is at least thinking twice before proceeding. In the end he probably will calculate that he can survive the sanctions and other non-military measures from the West. He is on a vision quest to restore the Russian Empire and Ukraine is the key to his ambitions. At this point, he cannot totally turn away. Deflect, delay, or otherwise play games with the timing or methods of attack, but in the end he will not leave Ukraine as it is.

The U.S. deployed about 5,000 troops from the 82nd Airborne Division to Poland. Accompanying them is a headquarters element from the XVIII Airborne Corps to form Joint Task Force (JTF) Dragon. Their deployment is designed to strengthen our ties to NATO and probably to help with the influx of refugees into Poland when the fighting starts. Additionally, about 2,000 troops are redeploying from Germany to Romania for the same reasons. Both Poland and Romania border Ukraine. There are about 80,000 members of the U.S. military in Europe including forces from every branch. Some of those are rotating forces that come in and out of various countries based on the threat and/or exercises. Less well known is the fact that the U.S. has elements of the U.S. Navy ashore in Poland and Romania. The Navy’s Aegis Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) System that is the main battery on our cruisers and destroyers is now in ground based installations in those two countries. Known as Aegis Ashore they are placed there to protect our NATO allies from “rogue” ballistic missiles — most likely from Iran or North Korea. They are purely defensive in nature, but you will sometimes hear Mr. Putin reference them when he talks about Russian security threats from NATO.

When the invasion begins, it is unlikely to start with Russian troops blasting their way across the border. The fighting will come in stages, perhaps with operational pauses to negotiate before the next attack. Cyber attacks will be followed by an onslaught from the air from the Russian air forces and from cruise missiles from Russian ships in the Black Sea. Ukraine has little in the way of air forces or air defense capabilities. The Russians will own the air space which will allow them to move forces with impunity and attack at will. Russia does not have to occupy the entire country. Decapitating the government and holding key positions in key cities will give them the “victory” that they need to control Ukraine’s future. Russia has been fighting in Syria for years. They made a point of rotating all of their key combat units through that battle space so that they are now all battle tested. Both in terms of individual units, and in terms of command and control of combat forces spread over a wide area — two things that they did not previously possess or do well. They have learned a lot of lessons and have applied them.

The Ukrainians have the will to resist but little in the way of organized military forces once they have been decimated from the air. Their plan is to conduct a guerilla war and to inflict as many Russian casualties as possible to undermine the will of the Russian people when their sons and daughters are killed or maimed.

Make no mistake about it. This is going to be ugly. Barring a Ukrainian surrender or collapse at the start, there will be tens of thousands of casualties and as many as a million refugees fleeing the country. This will have world impact, economically and politically. We will all suffer. As is often the case, once war begins, no one can predict whether it will spread or how it will play out in the end. A few “mistakes” could lead Europe into another war. Kyiv is a modern city with about 2.5 million residents. Once electricity is knocked out and water is unavailable living conditions in the city will deteriorate rapidly. In addition to war casualties, it will be a humanitarian disaster.

As President Biden and his cabinet have been warning us, events in Ukraine will not be about some far off place nobody has ever heard of or people we do not care about. Even if one thinks that now, a war in eastern Europe will impact all of us.

Europe Under Duress

Posted: January 25, 2022 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , | 3 Comments

As we are all undoubtedly aware, over the last two months Russia has increased the size, lethality, and capability of its combat and logistics forces along its border with Ukraine. Ukraine is now surrounded by Russian troops in Crimea (stolen from Ukraine), Russia, and Belarus, placing them under threat from the North, East and South.

There is much speculation as to what will unfold and as to Russia’s intent. There is only one person who knows whether Russia will attack and that is Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is entirely possible that even he does not know at this moment in time as to what he will do, but he has himself in a position of strength that gives him many plausible opportunities to achieve his goals.

We are at a moment in time where Mr. Putin sees his opportunity. The leading nations within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are facing domestic issues that help him with his plans. The United States is facing Congressional mid-term elections, France has national elections coming up, there is a new government in Germany that is still trying to find its way, and Prime Minister Boris Johnson of the United Kingdom is under considerable political pressure at home.

Negotiations are under way in Europe, with the US taking a leading role, to try and defuse the situation without abandoning Ukraine. To date, the Russians are making outrageous claims and are putting forward proposals that they must know are totally unacceptable to the West. Foremost among Mr. Putin’s demands is that Ukraine never be allowed to join NATO — a condition that cannot be accepted if nations are to be sovereign, independent and allowed to find their own destinies. He is also demanding that NATO revert to its 1997 boundaries. This means withdrawing all troops and weapons in Eastern Europe deployed since then which leaves Eastern European and Baltic States dangling as current members of NATO. On its face this is totally unacceptable, which Mr. Putin must know.

Mr. Putin does not want any western or western leaning countries on his border. In his public pronouncements he likens it to our reaction if Russian forces were in Cuba or Venezuela — which he made vague threats to do if he does not get his way. He believes that all former Soviet Socialist Republics as a minimum should be in his sphere of influence and that no former member of the Warsaw Pact should be in NATO. The world has moved on, but he has not.

What motivates his undivided attention on Ukraine? Traditionally and culturally the area of Eastern Europe that is now known as Ukraine was part of Russia. Kyiv was the first capital of the Rus people in the 10th to 12th centuries. Following WWI a Republic was born which resulted in civil unrest and battles with the Red Army. These continued until the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was established in 1922, making it one of the three original members of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Ukraine reclaimed its independence in August, 1991. Their independence became official when Ukraine, Belarus and Russia (the original founders) officially dissolved the USSR in December.

Following the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine stayed closely aligned with Russia. Starting in 2014, with considerable internal unrest, Ukraine began to move more towards western Europe. In that same year, Russia invaded Crimea (with stealth forces and special operations forces — the infamous “little green men” that Russia claimed were not theirs) and subsequently annexed it into Russia. Meddling in Ukraine continued as Russian operatives supported a civil war in southeastern Ukraine in a region known as Donbass. Fighting there continues to this day and has claimed about 15,000 lives.

Understanding the ethnicity and culture of Ukraine helps to explain some of the developments and may indicate where fighting could erupt, at least in the opening stages of military operations. Crimea is mostly populated with ethnic Russians, and large portions of eastern Ukraine (such as the Donbass) are heavily ethnic Russian. Central, northern and western Ukraine, including around its capital in Kyiv, are predominantly ethnic Ukrainians. There is a smattering of other nationalities throughout the country, especially Poles.

It is impossible for me to know his intentions but it would seem that Mr. Putin’s aim is to replace the current western leaning government with one within his sphere of influence. It would be a de facto puppet government, or at least one totally aligned with Russian interests. He is looking to dominate Ukraine as he does Belarus. Although Belarus is independent, their government makes no moves without at least tacit Russian approval.

Why do we care here in the United States? After all, we have plenty to worry about with the state of the pandemic and thwarting attempted coups. One reason is that there is the potential for the largest land war in Europe since WWII. Our lesson learned from the twentieth century is that our political and economic interests in Europe will inevitably pull us in to the conflict. NATO was formed as a deterrent to the USSR but also to bring together the fractious nations of Europe into a common cause. Further, we claim to honor the rule of law, the right for each nation to determine its own destiny, courses of action and affiliations, and to protect democracy.

It is unlikely that Mr. Putin will stop with Ukraine should he be successful. He has similar claims for the need to “protect” ethnic Russians in the Baltic States, Poland, and parts of other Eastern European nations. If successful in Ukraine, he will meddle elsewhere. If one thinks that a Putinesque leader is satisfied with “only” Ukraine, take a look at the developments in Europe in the 1930s leading up to WWII. Adolf Hitler was “just” protecting ethnic Germans in Poland, Czechoslovakia and elsewhere. There is no end.

There are many, many scenarios for Mr. Putin to achieve his ends. He does not necessarily have to invade with ground troops to achieve his goal, although the roughly 130,000 Russian troops from all over Russia that now nearly surround Ukraine certainly raises that possibility. His goal is simple, topple the current government and replace it. In recent days, public US and UK intelligence reports indicate that there are Russian operatives in Ukraine prepared to carry out “false flag” operations and other sabotage and that there are individuals in Ukraine or nearby that are set to take the reins of government. One scenario is that Mr. Putin gradually ups the ante. First comes crippling cyber attacks. Next, or simultaneously, take out energy and water supplies. If those actions are not sufficient to bring Ukraine to heel, then selected or even massive aerial attacks could ensue that take out culturally significant buildings and monuments and also aims to decapitate the existing government. These might be similar to the US “shock and awe” campaign in Iraq prior to the ground war. Sending troops across the border could be the last resort. As part of his plan Mr. Putin may even threaten Estonia, Latvia and/or Lithuanian or parts of Poland in order to take assets away from NATO that might otherwise provide support to Ukraine.

I do not envision that NATO will fight in Ukraine, but the member states can provide significant support. NATO is preparing to activate the NRF (NATO Response Force) designed to respond to threats to NATO members under the auspices of Article Five of the NATO charter where an “attack on one is an attack on all.”

The US and Europe are threatening very strong sanctions against Russia. However, there is little agreement as to exactly what those sanctions should be and should they apply before or after an attack? Does NATO deter or respond to Russian aggression? The biggest threat to Russia would be to cut off their petroleum exports. Unfortunately, the main source of heat in much of Europe is Russian natural gas and it is, after all, winter. To cut off those exports would devastate the Russian economy but it would also severely impact Europe’s economy and it would have a real impact on the rest of the world as well. No politician going into elections (which are coming up in the US, UK, and France) wants gas prices to go up just before an election.

One proposal is to block Russia from SWIFT. (The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications — the Belgian based intermediary for all bank transactions world wide.) This would essentially cut off Russia from any international commerce — they would be unable to sell or buy on the international market. Economically, it is a “nuclear option” with unknown consequences.

The US already has about 70,000 military personnel in Europe with about 6,000 of those in Poland and the Baltic states on short term unit rotations. Yesterday, the US announced that an additional 8,500 troops were put on heightened alert (meaning able to deploy within five days of getting the word to go) in order to bolster the NRF or to respond to other NATO nation’s requests for additional forces. In military terms, 8,500 troops in Europe is a symbolic gesture, but in strategic terms, it sends a clear signal to Mr. Putin that the US is serious about protecting our allies and that we would respond, thus upping the ante for Mr. Putin. There are not significant troops (roughly less than a hundred for training of Ukrainian forces) in Ukraine and there is no intent to put any combat troops in Ukraine.

Mr. Putin holds all the cards. He does not care much about sanctions as it will not impact him personally. To be honest, he probably thinks that any severe sanctions would be temporary and he would still have been successful in Ukraine. He probably feels that he has already raised his stature in Russia by making it appear that Russia is a great power that all the other countries in the world must respect and come to him to meet on his terms. In military terms, because of the common border, he has internal lines of communication and can quickly move forces as needed. Additionally, he already occupies some of their territory.

It is possible that he is waiting for the right time to strike, including waiting for the right weather conditions. There is a window fast approaching where the ground will be frozen hard enough to support large tracked vehicles such as tanks and mobile missile launchers. If he waits too long, the spring thaw will make much of the ground too marshy to effectively use until late spring or summer.

I am out of the prediction game, but at this point, I do not see Mr. Putin backing off. The only thing that will change his mind about attacking Ukraine, in whatever form, is the total capitulation of the Ukrainian government. To date, the Ukrainians swear that they will not fold. As a result, some sort of physical action will be required on Russia’s part to subjugate the Ukrainians.

It is equally unclear how far the US and Europe are willing to go to help Ukraine. Particularly weak in the knees right now are the French and German governments, the heart of any coordinated European response to Russian aggression. A secondary Putin goal is to weaken NATO and if possible, to create the conditions to render it meaningless as a toothless organization. To that end he may have already failed as both Finland and Sweden, not currently members of NATO, have expressed interest in exploring the chance to join. Both border Russia.

The coming weeks will be tough ones for Europe and the world. History tells us that to unleash the hounds of war often leads to perverse and unintended consequences and hostilities can easily spread. In the end, Mr. Putin may decide that in his risk/benefit calculation a direct assault on Ukraine will be counterproductive. History also shows that once nations mobilize for war, they are hard pressed to back down. There is a certain “use it or lose it” mentality. Let’s hope that clearer heads prevail.

Regardless, the next several weeks are fraught with danger.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →