As the war in Ukraine enters its fourth week there is beginning to be more clarity as to where the conflict might be heading. Regardless of how the military fighting is going, the loss of life and casualty toll is growing and intensifying. If anything, the size of the losses is increasing rapidly. This is true for the civilians in Ukraine as well as for the Russian and Ukrainian soldiers. All of this is occurring while much of the Russian public still does not have a real picture of how the battle is going.
The Russian military appears to have failed in its initial strategic intention to march into and across Ukraine in a matter of days. Russian tanks, personnel carriers, and artillery are still bogged down and the Russian military personnel are becoming emotionally deflated. Their promised “quick war” is not happening, and the military corps appears to be disorganized. This despite the fact that ariel attacks, missile launches, and long-range shelling are proceeding.
Russia remains unsure if China will be willing to provide sustainable support for Russia’s war with the West, or even provide the Russian economy with all its needs in the midst of the extremely effective, growing, Western sanctions campaign. At the same time the Ukrainian army is demonstrating remarkable resiliency and fortitude. It is conducting a tactically brilliant and well-disciplined fight against overwhelming odds, as they hold out waiting for increased military supplies to arrive.
President Vladimir Putin’s ego has been flattened. He unintentionally has shown that the West had constructed a grossly exaggerated picture of Russian combat readiness and military organization. Western military leaders and observers recognize that Putin may have lots of dangerous “toys ” in his military arsenal, but Russia appears to lack the properly disciplined officer corps to operationalize them effectively. Putin has now opted to employ the sadistic strategy that he used in Syria, Chechnya, and previously in Ukraine of carpet bombing the enemy into submission. Casualties mean nothing to Putin. Death and destruction producing hundreds of victims and refugees is the goal.
Putin now faces the most serious test of the war. Assuming he believes that the progress is too slow and slogging out a fight door-to-door will be exhausting and unsuccessful, does he have an off-ramp? Alternatively, will Putin decide to ratchet up the fight by introducing chemical or biological weapons or even tactical nuclear ones into the fray? Having seen his military appear as a paper tiger before the world, can he save himself; his personal prestige; and the military’s morale, by employing weapons of mass destruction which will underscore the extent of Russian brutality—and might not even succeed.
President Biden is contemplating—and will undoubtedly discuss with the NATO representatives next week in Brussels--a strategy to deliver the MIG planes which could be made available to the Ukrainians. These aircraft which Poland and other members of the former Warsaw Pact nations possess, could significantly improve the fighting capability of the Ukrainian defense forces; but would require calling Putin’s bluff. While the NATO leaders will undoubtedly discuss other military options, they will also review whether current diplomatic conversations are actually progressing. Most importantly, the President is likely to present a proposal to the Ministers as to how the Russians could still exit the conflict.
The most important strategy that President Biden needs to adopt is the one which President Obama failed to follow through on in Syria. Obama issued a red line in the sand to President Assad on the use of chemical weapons in 2012-13 in Syria (read Putin). When President Obama did not act directly after they were introduced into the conflict Syria, its patron Russia got the message. Now, President Biden needs to garner continued support from America’s NATO allies-- which so far have rallied strongly behind the U.S.--that if the Russians elevate the severity of the battle in Ukraine, the West will be prepared to respond unequivocally to Russia.
Comments