NATO'S ( And the U.S.'s) SHAME!
Zelensky calls for world leaders to help Ukraine or 'tomorrow war will knock on your doors'
America Could Have Done So Much More to Protect Ukraine
The paths to deterrence were not taken.
After Ukraine became independent and forfeited the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal, the West could have loosened the purse strings to guarantee the country’s economic independence. After the 2004 Orange Revolution, the West could have embraced Ukraine’s Western aspirations, accelerated an EU Association Agreement and a NATO Membership Action Plan, and driven domestic transformation to shield Europe’s largest country from nascent Russian revanchism. After the 2014 Revolution of Dignity, the West could have invested in a strategic security partnership with Ukraine that would have made the costs of a Russian offensive prohibitively high. Yet none of this came to pass.
Instead, for two decades, the U.S. entertained illusions about what might be accomplished with Russia, a reluctant partner, while remaining oblivious to opportunities in Ukraine, a far more willing one. In its relationship with Russia, the U.S. had limited prospects of achieving any objectives outside of arms control, whereas with Ukraine it might have successfully influenced regional development.
The seed of this conflict was planted many years ago, across multiple Republican and Democratic administrations. But the Biden administration and its successors will own the geopolitical consequences of this war.
The U.S. refused to provide advanced weapon systems to Ukraine, such as Patriot anti-aircraft missiles or Harpoon anti-ship missiles, because it determined that Ukraine’s armed forces were not sophisticated enough to handle them. Although Ukraine would have struggled to realize the full potential of these systems, they could nonetheless have affected Russia’s calculus for military operations. And for those who might argue that Russia would have preempted the shipment of weaponry by invading, I would contend that if invasion was already the predicted outcome, what was there to lose?
Besides military pressure, the U.S. also failed to consider graduated response options once Putin’s preferred course of action had been established. The U.S. could have imposed targeted sanctions on Russian leadership or introduced long-overdue anti-corruption legislation to signal the impending costs of reinvasion to the Kremlin. By choosing to view these options through an all-or-nothing lens, the U.S. unnecessarily constrained its response. Biden’s administration was reactive when it should have been proactive. Over and over, the president’s longtime senior advisers seem to have recommended narrow, low-risk policy options, and these backfired.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/02/ukraine-russia-war-nato-biden-deterrence/622873/
NATO Leaves Black Sea Exposed As Russia Invades Ukraine
Russia-Ukraine crisis: Despite a stated resolve to deter Russia, the NATO alliance has failed to prevent it from building a presence in Black Sea area.
When Russia attacked Ukraine, the nearest naval vessel of a major NATO ally was in the Mediterranean. The last such ship from a major naval member of the Western military alliance left the Black Sea -- an area roughly the size of California bordering Russia, Ukraine and NATO members Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania –
over a month ago.
As NATO scrambles to respond to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a major exposed flank is the Black Sea. Despite a stated resolve to deter Russia, the alliance has failed to prevent it from building a presence in the area.
A key reason: divisions among members over whether to challenge Russia's navy in the area, resulting in a lack of coherent and meaningful Black Sea NATO strategy, according to Reuters interviews with diplomats, intelligence officials and security sources from NATO members as well as military strategists, retired military commanders and shipping industry officials.
That includes reluctance by some NATO members, notably Turkey, to agree to maritime patrols to avoid provoking Moscow, they said. Other factors are budget constraints and the existence of other priorities among some major NATO allies, they added.
Nazi Germany, 1938, Hitler reclaims Sudetenland, and the British PM at the time - Chamberlain - declares he had achieved “peace for our time” after securing an agreement from Hitler that he would not advance further.
Comments
Post a Comment