With all the election and Trump news, is anyone paying attention to the War in Ukraine – what the United States is doing, or not doing?
America has done a lot for Ukraine in its defensive war against Russia, to be sure – but maybe not enough. That could also be said for several other nations in NATO and the European Union.
While we have sent a lot of military equipment and human relief goods, it always seems to be too little, too late – such as the longer-range missile batteries. Some things we have refused – such as declaring a no-fly zone or providing the Jet fighters currently in Poland.
We have denied Ukraine-specific intelligence that can pinpoint potential targets – although we will confirm the existence of targets. We will not provide the critical co-ordinates. Some say we are providing the co-ordinates, but not admitting to it.
One of the conditions America has placed on some of the longer-range weapons is that they are not to be fired into Russia. Really? How can one expect to win a war if you are not allowed to take out key military installations – such as weapon locations and supply dumps?
As Winter approaches, Putin’s army is engaging in prima facie war crimes by targeting energy facilities with the overt purpose of denying the civilian population essential heat. This is premeditated mass murder. Even as this outrange escalates, the United States is not responding … not increasing support of Ukraine … not taking actions against Russia. There are no new sanctions – and certainly no improved military response.
It is not even clear if the West is increasing a humanitarian response to mitigate the impact of Putin’s incessant bombing of civilian targets. There is a shortage of doctors and field medical facilities.
We may have seen one change of policy. Ukraine forces have attacked military targets inside Russia – in one case, a storage depot just two miles outside of Moscow. Some interpret this as meaning that the United States has given a wink-of-the-eye approval to attack Mother Russia. Officially, we do not approve.
There is no reason we should be coy about that. In fact, we should provide the supplies and encouragement to attacks inside Russia more often – to take out as much of Putin’s military infrastructure, resources, and equipment as possible. The strategy should be to cut off the supply lines to the Russian troops in Ukraine.
Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin had the best answer to when the War in Ukraine ends. She said, “When there are no more Russian troops in Ukraine.” (A pretty bold statement from a nation awaiting final approval of its NATO application.) Anything short of that – such as a negotiated settlement that some in Washington are proposing – is a victory for Putin … period.
If there is to be a real Ukrainian victory, then the West – led by the United States – should be providing more than so-called defensive weapons. The Ukrainian military should be equipped with whatever they need to bring the War to Russian soil. We should provide all the necessary target intelligence and the equipment to attack every military resource currently feeding the Russian invasion.
And as a sideshow, we should pressure Iran to cease supplying drones and technicians to bomb those civilian targets.
Yes, I know Putin will again rattle the nuclear saber – using limited tactical nuclear weapons. He should be told with steely eyes that NATO has far more nuclear ability than Russia – and will use It in response. That message should be sent to China and North Korea – encouraging them to put pressure on Putin.
Even if nuclear weapons were used, there would no Third World War nuclear Armageddon. As insane as Putin may be, those surrounding him would not allow it. As in the United States, the President does not have a button or a single order that launches the atomic arsenal. It goes through a complicated chain-of-command in which an order from the top can be aborted. It is time we stop being intimidated by Putin’s bluster and get on with winning the War.
So, there ‘tis.