
Welcome to the Gray Zone and the Future of Great Power Competition
This is part one of a 3-part series by Cipher Brief Expert and former Assistant Director of CIA for South and Central Asia Dave Pitts, who also […] More
OPINION — As the days wind down to what will arguably be the most consequential election in the first half of the 21st Century, there is a critical issue which is not being addressed adequately by either candidate: the war in Ukraine.
There are differences in the approaches of the Republican and Democratic candidates on the issue, with former President Donald Trump saying he will end the war if he is elected and Vice President Harris suggesting her administration would continue to support Ukraine in the manner we have seen under President Biden. Neither candidate has addressed the consequences of Ukrainian defeat for the security of the United States and the West nor has either candidate articulated a strategy for victory.
Ukrainian defeat—either on the battlefield with Russian forces occupying the territory now known as Ukraine – or with Ukraine being compelled to sue for peace and conceding to Russia the parts of Ukraine currently occupied by Russian forces—would have catastrophic and far-reaching consequences for the West as Putin’s decision to invade would have been validated.
Despite the casualties suffered by Russian forces, the abysmal performance of the Russian military in general, the deterioration of Russia’s strategic position with Finland and Sweden joining NATO, President Putin will still be able to present to the Russian people and his allies in the Axis of resistance something he can describe—however Pyrrhic—as victory. That should scare the hell out of all of us. Here’s why.
Thus emboldened, it is reasonable to expect that this Axis, confident in the support from their strategic nuclear power protector, will focus on their “to do list” of conquest, whether that means the destruction of Israel, the assimilation of Taiwan into the Peoples Republic of China, or a North Korean invasion of South Korea or a combination of those.
This is not some resurrection of the Domino theory – the idea that a political event in one country will spur similar events in other countries. It is happening right in front of us at this very moment in time. We are living in a world where there is war in Europe and the Russian aggressor is slowly gaining the upper hand leaving open the possibility of wider war. The same is true in the Middle East, where the world is monitoring the possibility of a spread of that war with trepidation.
The consequences of a Russian victory on the risk of nuclear proliferation could be similarly catastrophic.
Iran will certainly finish its sprint for a nuclear weapon. Saudi Arabia and Turkey may feel compelled to follow. Japan and South Korea—both scientifically and technologically capable of building a nuclear weapons program—may follow as well with confidence in the U.S. nuclear umbrella having been eroded.
The risks associated with Ukrainian defeat should have been a more prominent subject of discussion in the current election campaign. One candidate or the other has the opportunity to present a strategy for victory – but a victory that won’t erode U.S. and western national security in the long run.
For the Republican candidate, there are a few things that should rise to critical status when it comes to U.S. national security.
First, a return to the roots of the party which was so strongly pro-defense and anti-communist through the Cold War would be a good vehicle of strength and would likely appeal to many Republican base voters who recognize the importance of the current conflict. President Trump needs to realize and publicly acknowledge that Putin is his enemy and the arch enemy of the United States. He should refute the idea that he has a special relationship with and can somehow influence Putin. This is not the case. Putin is a committed enemy of the United States and Western values and Putin is certainly confident in his ability to manipulate Trump. Trump needs to understand that it’s critical to turn the tables on Putin.
Second, Trump should articulate a plan for strategic victory against Putin and the evil axis that the Russian president has created. An important step would be to do something the current administration has been unwilling to do, (apparently for fear of provoking Putin to sue a nuclear weapon) bring together a coalition of western leaders and replicate what Roosevelt and Churchill accomplished in the Casablanca Conference in January 1943.
At that conference the U.S. and British leaders (Stalin was unable to attend) coordinated strategic plans against the Axis powers and promulgated the policy of “unconditional surrender.” An appropriate 21st century version of that conference would certainly include coordination of strategic planning for addressing the challenges presented by the Axis of Resistance on both the economic and military fronts and strategy for dealing with surrogates.
Third, articulate clear support for Ukraine and define the conditions for victory: complete withdrawal of Russian forces to pre-March 2014 borders, agreement to pay reparations for damages caused by the invasion and the remanding of war criminals to justice in The Hague. A conference with the above messaging would send a powerful and historic message to the people of Ukraine, our allies, the Global South, and most importantly to the Axis powers and their populations.
And finally, President Trump should announce the removal of restrictions on the use of U.S.-provided weaponry, allowing Ukraine to strike military targets located deeper in the Russian Federation. The same military targets that are actively engaged in the unprovoked war on Ukraine. Trump cannot worry about Putin’s red lines and should boldly announce that Putin should worry about ours. (To this point, the Kremlin has done its level best to hide the consequences of the war from the Russian people. In announcing this change in U.S. policy, the message President Reagan had for Gorbachev should be paraphrased. “Mr. Putin, End this war!”)
Vice President Kamala Harris should realize that Putin is racist and chauvinistic and will judge her through this lens. In his mind, he may be categorizing the Vice President as a weaker version of former President Barack Obama, for whom Putin clearly had a deep personal loathing and lack of respect. Unlike President Trump, Vice President Harris is in a position to take steps before the election to help shape a very different view of her likely approach to national security and foreign policy. The most important immediate step she should take is to convince the current administration to remove restrictions on Ukraine’s ability to use U.S. provided weaponry (and weaponry provided by our allies that contain U.S. component parts) to strike targets in the territory of the Russian Federation as their defense needs require.
Both candidates should realize that the collapse of Ukraine during their presidency will be a black mark on their legacy forever and the national security risk this introduces to the United States will undermine any achievements they might make in domestic policy. They will be remembered by history for their shortsightedness and naiveté.
This is a choice between victory and ignominy. Choose the former. It may decide the election, it most certainly will determine how history remembers the next president.
The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals. Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.
Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to [email protected] for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief.
Related Articles
This is part one of a 3-part series by Cipher Brief Expert and former Assistant Director of CIA for South and Central Asia Dave Pitts, who also […] More
DEEP DIVE — The war in Ukraine has veered into volatile new territory, ignited by a final push — in Washington and Kyiv – to alter […] More
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW — For the first time, the Biden Administration has authorized Ukraine to use long-range ATACMS missiles to strike targets inside Russia, a policy […] More
DEEP DIVE — The first bulletins hit late in the evening of February 23, 2022 in the U.S., and just before dawn on the 24th in […] More
DEEP DIVE — President-elect Donald Trump’s promise of a quick end to Russia’s war on Ukraine is something that Ukrainians desperately want, as the full-scale invasion […] More
DEEP DIVE — In at least five battleground states Tuesday, polling places were targeted by bomb threats, “many of which appear to originate from Russian […] More
Search