EXPERT PERSPECTIVE / OPINION – (Part one of two) - There was an air of critical importance to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s most recent trip to the U.S., his third since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
As in earlier trips that Zelensky has made to Washington since Russia’s unprovoked acts of aggression, the president’s most important mission was to convince U.S. lawmakers of the urgent need to approve additional aid to Ukraine. The aid he was seeking is currently caught up in disputes in Congress with some representatives insisting that the package (that is also linked with aid to Israel) be additionally linked with legislation to fix illegal immigration at the U.S. southern border.
President Joe Biden has urged Congress to pass the additional aid for Ukraine and Israel which he described as ‘critical’ and noted that funding for assistance to Ukraine will soon run out. The dilemma in Washington may be on its way toward resolution (not likely this year though) and it reminds me of a reflection attributed to Winston Churchill about the U.S. before the U.S. entered the war against Germany in 1941, “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they have tried everything else.” Let’s hope that is as true in this case, as it was in World War II.
The problem on the U.S. southern border is serious and arguably a national security matter, but it should not be linked to aid for Ukraine which is in an existential crisis from its larger aggressive neighbor, Russia.
If the aid package is approved, it will still not be sufficient to deter Putin from continued aggression against Ukraine and possibly elsewhere. The world, led by the West, must send an unambiguous and unified message to Putin that his aggression will not stand. In addition, the West needs to take strong steps to ensure Ukraine’s future security.
Russia’s dictator, Vladimir Putin seems to have embarked on a premature victory march. On December 14, he resumed his customary year-end marathon public/press conference after having canceled the event last year. This 'conference’ allows members of the Russian public and media the opportunity to present questions to their President.
Notably, during 2013’s version of the conference, U.S. traitor Edward Snowden 'managed’ to ask Putin a question about surveillance. To my knowledge, no U.S. traitors had the opportunity to ask Putin a question this year. But there were a number of questions about Russia’s ‘Special Military Operation’ in Ukraine and Russia’s overall objectives.
Notably, Putin commented that “Peace (in Ukraine) will be possible after “denazification, demilitarization, and a neutral status. As for demilitarization, they don’t want to negotiate, so we are then forced to take other measures, including military measures. Either we agree or we need to resolve (the issue) by force.” Referring to the conflict’s origins, Putin said “The unbridled desire to creep towards our borders, taking Ukraine into NATO, all this led to this tragedy.”
Seemingly on a roll, on December 17, Putin said, “They (the West) took Finland and dragged it into NATO. Why, did we have any disputes with Finland? All disputes including those of a territorial nature in the middle of the 20th Century, have all been resolved long ago. There were no problems, but now there will be because we will now create the Leningrad military district there and will definitely concentrate military units there.”
Notably, in recent weeks, Finland has decided to close its border with Russia because of Russian efforts to force potential immigrants to cross the border without visas.
Putin seems to have gained confidence from the dissension over aid to Ukraine in the U.S. Congress. He recently announced his intention to run for a fifth term as President after having been “asked to run by combat veterans from the Donetsk Peoples Republic.” His next term will expire in 2030, at which time Putin will be 78 years old. Putin is also encouraged by actions of some other leaders, his ally, Viktor Orban, the autocratic-leaning Prime Minister of Hungary seems to be dancing to Putin’s tune by opposing additional aid to Ukraine from the EU. Turkey’s President (and aspiring President for life) Recep Tayyip Erdogan seems to be in step by continuing to slow-roll Swedish membership in NATO. The U.S. and EU need to prioritize finding means to put pressure on these two leaders to recognize on which side of the new Iron Curtain their countries are located.
The situation on the battlefield in Ukraine is not as bleak as some portray it. Kyiv has shown remarkable resilience and capability on both the battlefield and with its economy and political comity since Russia invaded.
According to a recently disclosed U.S. estimate, more than 315,000 Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded since the war began. Moscow is making marginal gains in some directions of late, but at tremendous cost. Ukrainian sources say Russian forces recently lost 1,250 soldiers, 19 tanks and 37 artillery systems in one day of combat operations.
While Ukrainian forces in many areas have settled into defensive positions as winter conditions affect battlefield operations, the Ukrainians still have beachheads on the east bank of the Dnipro River and Ukraine continues to demonstrate the ability to use drone operations to strike targets in Crimea and deep inside the Russian Federation. Ukraine has chased the Russian Black Sea Fleet to safer harbors to the east while establishing a shipping corridor in the Black Sea to export grain and other products.
Read Are Cowboy Boots on the Ground the U.S.’s Secret Weapon in Ukraine exclusively in The Cipher Brief
The question of the expansion of NATO to the east seems to be particularly vexing to Putin and his ilk who seem to believe history either started or ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in late 1991. I write “started or ended” because Putin use of history is somewhat fluid. He is quick to note alleged promises made to Russia by the West about the eastward expansion of NATO despite the fact there is no treaty or written agreement proscribing such expansion.
The Russians can complain fairly about statements made by western officials in the context of German unification and about said eastward expansion, but they surely must recall statements made by equally senior officials in the West, that those statements only applied to Germany and not to eastern Europe and the 2+4 agreement of 1990, which makes no mention of future NATO expansion east of Germany.
But all of Russia’s complaints about promises made or broken, ignore Moscow’s responsibility for pre - and post-World War II actions that led to NATO’s formation. Examples include the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact that set the stage for Hitler’s invasion of Poland and the start of World War II in Europe, Stalin’s invasion of Poland days later, and Soviet Russia’s invasion of Finland and occupation of the Baltic States.
The reason NATO expanded eastward was because these countries feared and continue to fear their aggressive neighbor to the east and with good reason as the ‘Special Military Operation’ illustrates.
Putin is perfectly happy to recite history after the collapse of the Soviet Union but forgets history when convenient. His June 2021 essay on the Unity of the Russian and Ukrainian Peoples is filled with Putin’s reconstruction of history to support claims for his ambition to reclaim territory he claims belonged to Imperial Russia (Erdogan please note: some of this territory includes parts of modern Turkey). And while complaining of broken promises by the West, Putin conveniently forgets about Russia’s obligations under the Budapest Memorandum signed in December 1994, in which the signatories agreed to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.
The West should take the opportunity to interrupt Putin’s victory lap with a resounding, resolute and unified affirmation of Ukraine’s independence and sovereignty as well as conditions for victory. Statements by individual Western political leaders are insufficient to the task at hand.
The United States should take the lead to organize a meeting of leaders of the West and allies and affirm support for Ukraine and set conditions for ending the conflict. To wit, at a minimum: Russian withdrawal from all Ukrainian territory including “annexed” territory including Crimea; reparations for war damages, remanding of war criminals for trial; and providing clear security guarantees for Ukraine. Anything short of this will only encourage Putin and leaders of his ilk.
Putin’s whole game is based on confidence in his assessment that the West is politically divided, its leaders are weak, public support for Ukraine can be manipulated and eroded and eventually populist and isolationist leaders will come to power in major Western capitals.
To support the above political step, NATO should initiate immediate fast-track discussions on Ukrainian membership. Moreover, Western powers should remove the restrictions they have put on Ukraine’s use of weapons provided for their defense. No reasonable person would assert that Ukraine would use these weapons against Russia if Ukraine were not under invasion.
Hesitancy in the west on either of these steps seems to stem from a desire to avoid “provoking” Putin. This shows a serious misunderstanding of both the current situation and the character of Putin and the kleptocracy he has built.
Putin should be made to fear provoking the West.
Calls for Ukraine to switch to a “hold and build” strategy are an admission of defeat and will be used by Putin as a cadence for his victory march. None of the steps recommended above will be easy. Leadership never is, but it’s high time for resolute leadership.
It is time to prove Putin wrong.
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 Editor@thecipherbrief.com for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
