Peace and Security – At What Price?
Let me say this right up front: The civilized world needs a Russian defeat. A year ago, it seemed that Putin would lead a weakened and battered country. The United States (US) and Europe (EU) had a window of opportunity to send the Russians home with their tail between their legs; however, there were several instances of too little/too late support for Ukraine. I have detailed many of these in previous writings.
I waited several months before continuing my series on the war in Ukraine because I felt there would be a series of events last fall that would make the outcome of the war more transparent and certain. I now realize this was based on hope more than reality. This became clearer to me when I participated in a webinar on the war last fall when the keynote speaker indicated that the very survival of the Putin regime was predicated on a successful outcome on Russian terms. The speaker did not specify what a Russian victory would look like; however, he did say that it was impossible for Russia to give up any of the territories it currently occupies, including Crimea. It seems one of Putin’s goals is to control the Black Sea. This is of utmost importance to Putin and includes Ukraine not having direct access to the sea, including the port of Odesa.
Looking at this war, I completely understand the question of why the US should or should not provide financial support. I have often wondered if there was an explanation that would help the average American understand the answer to that question. This is an important concept and deserves a serious answer. I also fully appreciate this is not something that weighs on the general public, given our problems with the southern border. The question at hand – at least in my mind – is why should we defend Ukraine’s territory when we do not control our own border.
If you remember Tucker Carlson’s question: “Why is it worth our money and lives to defend some NATO allies?” The answer is that this is crucial to our national interest and security. And, of course, I am fully aware that Ukraine is not a member of NATO.
My response is that this conflict is not solely about Ukraine. As we have seen over the past two years, Ukrainians are willing to fight for their country and have done an admirable job. After all, Putin thought he would take Kyiv in a couple of days and install a government loyal to Russia; however, that did not happen for many reasons. Having said all that, the question is, what is this war about?
It is about our way of life, including our economic security and prosperity. In my view, this is where the current US administration has not been effective in making the case for continued support of Ukraine. The goal of Putin is to dominate Europe and have the EU accountable to him regarding the quality of their life and freedoms. And he was close to achieving this with his energy policies. He basically had Europe, i.e., Germany, under his thumb by being able to blackmail the Germans by using Russian oil and gas as a political and economic weapon.
It took the war in Ukraine for the EU to open its eyes finally and to realize what former President Trump was saying was reality. He frankly told the Europeans they were committing economic suicide if they completed the gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, and the events over the past two years proved he was correct. So, the big question at this point – is whether the United States and NATO are on a collision course with Russia. I do not have a military background and will not provide definitive conclusions on the future; however, it is getting harder to imagine getting out of a direct conflict with Russia. However, there is one scenario that would certainly help in this regard, and this involves the democratic world providing the weapons Ukraine needs to force the Russian military off its land. We have already seen the Ukrainian’s willingness to fight. Any reasonable person should never question that.
Since the war started, I have tried to stay away from making predictions, but one thing I feel confident about is this. It is hard to imagine not having a military conflict with Russia if they capture Ukraine. If Putin were to be successful in taking Ukraine, he would not stop there. Russia will continue to build a military to take over other countries in Eastern Europe, with Poland and the Baltic Countries being their first targets. My view is losing or not even fighting for Ukraine would be seen all over Europe as the end of American predominance to our closest allies.
If you recall, when Putin first began his full-scale invasion of Ukraine, he disguised the attack as an act of self-defense while at the same time saying Russia had no interest in occupying Ukraine. His exact words were, “We do not plan to impose ourselves on anyone.” However, his stance has now changed based on the recent weakening – or perceived– of US resolve. Putin is now openly using the language of imperialism by referencing Russian “conquests” in Ukraine.
Recently, Putin dismissed Ukraine’s peace formula by expressing his unwillingness even to discuss the status of the Ukrainian regions currently under Russian occupation. He stated, “as for the negotiation process, this is an attempt to encourage Russia to abandon the conquests we have made over the past one and half years. He commented, “everyone understands this is impossible.” These statements also further discredit Russian efforts to blame the invasion on an imaginary Nazi threat and a nonexistent NATO threat.
Putin’s comments on NATO were also undermined by his lack of concern over Finland’s decision to join NATO. When the Finnish government decided to join NATO after decades of neutrality, Putin made some irrational comments on this, but he reacted by demilitarizing Russia’s 1300-kilometer border with Finland. Russia’s grievances on NATO do not stand up to scrutiny, and neither does the narrative that a group of Nazis runs Ukraine. This was done to gain grassroots support in Russia to support the war. Putin’s attempts to portray Ukraine as some fascist threat play well in Russia but have failed to convince the rest of the world. The simple explanation for this is that there are no actual Nazis in Ukraine’s current government; however, there are currently some who still have allegiances to Russia.
Looking at the initial stages of this war, it appeared that the US and European response would devastate Russia and its economy. The Ukrainian resistance, poor planning, and poor execution by the Russian military hastened the Russian demise, or so everyone thought.
The critical issue is if Putin succeeds in Ukraine, will he stop? The answer is no, but the relevant question is how far Putin’s ambitions will extend. He has already said that much of unoccupied Ukraine is historical Russian lands. This includes the country’s Black Sea port of Odesa and the entire coastline. As noted in previous writings, he does not want Ukraine to have any access to the Black Sea. This fact alone is reason enough to believe that a ceasefire along the current front lines would not stop Putin. This will merely serve as a pause to allow Russia to rearm and regroup.
Suppose Putin’s imperialistic language indicates this growing confidence amid mounting signs of US and EU weakness. In that case, Poland, the Czech Republic, the Baltics, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Amenia, and Central Asian republics are all within the realm of conquest. Based on recent events. Putin firmly believes he can outlast the democratic world. He wants desperately to reconstruct the former Soviet Union during his lifetime.
The current US Administration needs to do a much better job of conveying the message that support for Ukraine is not charity. Instead, it is an investment in global security. Daily, I hear a government official say that the money we have provided Ukraine is being wasted or stolen. This is not based on reality.
As an illustration, let’s take the $50 billion commonly mentioned that the US has provided to Ukraine to date. The reality behind this number is that we have not given Ukraine $50 billion in cash. It is estimated that approximately $40 billion is being paid to large defense companies, including Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and other contractors, to replenish our weapons stockpile and replace the ones we have provided Ukraine. This $40 billion never leaves our shores. The question of why the Secretary of Defense has not provided a breakdown of the resources is valid. Any analysis of this should clearly demonstrate that producing these new weapons is a positive for the American economy.
The other $10 billion has supported humanitarian projects: food and housing, rebuilding energy infrastructure, and helping Ukrainians survive the harsh winters. As a side note, it should be noted that other NATO allies and partners, combined, have contributed more financial assistance to Ukraine than the US alone. Let me repeat: the support for Ukraine is not charity but rather an investment in our security. And the price for this security will be peanuts if Russia becomes emboldened and attacks a NATO country. You are then talking about WWIII.
Remember when Putin said this was not just a war on Ukraine but a war on the US and NATO? He claimed that the West was imperial and morally corrupt and indicated that such societies should not exist.
However, the cost of supporting Ukraine should never have been an issue, certainly not to the extent it is now. As noted in my previous writings, the US and EU should focus on the Russian Central Bank reserves. These reserves total approximately $350 billion. Russia has committed war crimes; these crimes are apparent and provable in a court of law, and the damages can be calculated. This is not just a legal but also a political and moral issue. The US and the EU should be prepared (by all means) to obtain this money to help Ukraine win this war and then rebuild the country.
My last thought regarding our security and the security of our closest allies is that Hamas’ attack on Israel on October 7 was not an isolated one but rather a part of a larger and growing war that Russia started with Ukraine. The war in the Middle East has been carefully constructed with input from Putin. The date the war started – October 7 – is Putin’s birthday. Was that a coincidence? I think not.
Iran is Putin’s main ally in Ukraine and has supplied the Russian military with thousands of drones that are used to kill Ukrainian civilians daily. The wars in Ukraine and Israel are being played straight out of Putin’s playbook, which includes unprecedented human devastation. Just look at what happened in Chechnya when Putin first assumed power.
The current US administration does not want a bigger war, but Putin does not plan to play by anyone’s rules but his own. Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea see the current administration as weak, and they feel they have a unique opportunity to rework the world order in their favor. If the US wants to be the world leader, we need leaders who know what leadership looks like. Leading from behind and acquiescing are not traits of leadership. President Reagan, remember him? He was the guy who brought down Putin’s Soviet Union. Reagan understood it takes a balance between respect and fear. At the moment, our enemies see neither of these. Reagan must be turning over in his grave.
According to Gen. Phil Breedlove, “If the US and the EU choose to give Ukraine what they need to win, Ukraine will win this war.” It is time for the political elite to listen to their military advisors. As I have noted previously, it should be more than evident that the Russian Federation can not be trusted as long as Putin is in power, so let’s quit pretending we care what he thinks.
Prepared by Terry L. Stroud – January 2024
