It appears that Russian President Vladimir Putin may have only two choices left; three if he is very lucky. Putin can either exit Ukraine having lost the war and declare that he upheld the dignity of Russia which had been besmirched by Ukraine. Second, he might say declare victory and leave Ukraine having made this point, with the status quo intact. At present, this appears unlikely even though Russia is destroying everything it can in Ukraine. The Russian military is following the tactic that it employed in previous attacks in Europe as well as in in its scorched earth tactic in Syria. Finally, Putin could depart Ukraine, but he first will try to destroy Ukraine through the introduction of tactical nuclear weapons into the conflict. While he may well consider using chemical or even biological weapons against Ukraine, it is not clear if Putin will cross the line and bring nukes into play. It is this last possibility which keeps most defense analysts up at night.
The war in Ukraine is unlikely to end very soon. In fact, there is a sense that months and even years of conflict are not out of the question, unless Russia is suddenly able to turn the tables on Ukraine. If the war continues to drag on, there is a distinct probability that eventually frustration could bring Russia to use “nukes”.
The issue is not exclusively the nature and size of weapons that Putin might discharge but the frequency and the noticeable damage. Putin knows that his military’s performance in Ukraine has been abysmal. In fact, most in the West have been surprised at the ineffectiveness of the entire military operation: tactics, weapons, soldier morale, as well as field and strategic command. U.S. intelligence has been extremely impressive, before the actual outbreak of hostilities and during the fighting. Should Putin now opt to use tactical nuclear weapons, the pressure on the U.S. politically from all sides will be intense. The question of whether and/or how to respond to such an escalation will be existential. Could or should the U.S. respond as well with battlefield nuclear weapons, and will Western allies support such a move? This debate, no doubt, is already being engaged among Western military and political leaders at the highest levels.
Those recommending that the U.S. must respond in kind to Russian introduction of nukes, derive their position from a sense that failure to do so would lead to a conclusion that the U.S. lacked the will to fight. Observers as well as possible future adversaries might sense that the U.S. was soft when the going got too tough. This could suggest a weakness, even if there were totally acceptable explanations for such reluctance.
On the other hand, should the U.S. respond with nuclear weapons, it would demonstrate that Washington will not permit its friends and allies to be pushed around by a dictator. It would signal that the U.S. is capable, reliable, and serious about defending itself and its allies when endangered. The nuclear fallout will be considerable and the ability to adopt a policy of deterrence in the future would be undermined. At the same time, China, North Korea, and Iran would be put on notice that the U.S. is a serious player.
----------
The Race to November
The President’s personal poll numbers and those of the Democrats in general suggest that a major defeat is looming for his party in November, unless he can turn the public’s perceptions around by Labor Day. While the Federal Reserve finally has a full complement of Governors, economic news suggests that the public is hardly confident that either the Fed or the Biden Administration is moving quickly enough to address the continuing inflation. Regardless of whether one reads the charts from Wall Street or the signs at the gas station or the price tags in the supermarkets, the public’s anxiety level continues to rise. As James Carville kept exclaiming during Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign, “It’s the economy stupid.” Americans almost always vote their pocketbook.
When inflation is coupled with America’s continuing anxiety about whether the pandemic is really under control, the voters next November are unlikely to exhibit any interest in maintaining the political status quo. Ironically, the only possible positive card President Biden possesses at this time is the Democrats’ long-standing support for a woman’s right to choose. That alone will be insufficient to enable the Democrats to at least maintain control of the Senate after the mid-term elections.
Comments