Rick Newman
With no public notice, the United States has provided Ukraine an advanced missile system it withheld for the first 20 months of Ukraine’s war with Russia. Count that as the latest escalatory move in a world that suddenly seems filled with intensifying conflict.
Russia will threaten mayhem in response. Yet President Biden may finally have decided that the best way forward in Ukraine is to go all-in and help the besieged nation win on the battlefield instead of merely preventing it from losing. If so, it’s an overdue assertion of American power that could mark a defining moment of Biden’s presidency and perhaps help his 2024 reelection effort.
On Oct. 17, Ukraine struck a Russian airfield about 80 miles behind the front lines, destroying several helicopters and a bunch of other Russian equipment. Most missiles in Ukraine’s arsenal can’t travel that far with the kind of explosives that can destroy a fleet of aircraft arrayed on a tarmac. Russian images of the debris showed components of the US Army tactical missile system, known as ATACMS, and US officials told several news organizations the United States has finally given Ukraine the long-range missiles they’ve been pleading for. The fact that Russia left helicopters vulnerable to such a strike suggests they didn’t think Ukraine would get the missiles.
Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Biden’s support has been instrumental, with the United States donating far more military equipment than any other nation. But Biden has also taken an incremental approach meant to avoid sharp provocations that could somehow trigger a wider American war with Russia. Since there has been no wider war, Biden can claim his approach has worked. But he has also taken considerable flak for holding back capabilities Ukraine needs to make decisive battlefield breakthroughs.
One after another, US weapons systems first deemed too risky to put in Ukraine’s hands have ended up there anyway, including armored personnel carriers, tanks, missile defense systems and medium-range missiles known as HIMARS. European nations and other Ukraine allies often follow America’s lead and send their own advanced weapons once the United States opens the door. Russian threats of nuclear retaliation or other dire consequences have never materialized. Biden critics contend that providing Western weapons sooner would have saved Ukrainian lives and hastened Russia's defeat, with no downside.
A handful of ATACMS hitting a couple of Russian targets doesn’t mean a new wonder weapon will promptly flip the direction of the war in Ukraine’s favor. The United States may not provide very many, and Ukraine might not get versions with the types of warheads that can hurt Russia the most by destroying bridges, ships, or other large targets up to 100 miles away.
Live fire testing of early versions of the Army Tactical Missile System at White Sands Missile Range, N.M., on Dec. 14, 2021. )
Yet Biden’s crossing of his own boundary in greenlighting the ATACMS delivery may reveal a new boldness at the White House, following the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel and the immediate reshuffling of American and Western priorities around the world. When Ukraine was the only major war America needed to support, a measured pace of progress might have seemed okay. But America must now support two wars, and that brings new urgency to pick up the pace in Ukraine and press for breakthroughs.
Three developments have changed the US calculus on Ukraine. First, continued funding is now at risk. When Congress passed temporary spending bills at the end of September, it left out further aid for Ukraine, even though Biden is asking for $24 billion for the next 12 months. That could have come in follow-up legislation, except Republicans fired their own House speaker on Oct. 3 and basically shut down the House, scrambling the outlook for all future legislation. There’s majority support for more Ukraine aid in Congress, but a conservative minority opposes it, and they’re now exercising a kind of microminority veto power in the House. There’s a pathway to getting billions more for Ukraine, but that could be the last big package for a while, or maybe ever. It’s time to convert US aid into a knockout blow against Russian forces.
The mushrooming Israel-Hamas war is another threat to Ukraine. US support for Israel seems ironclad, and Ukraine may now have to compete with Israel for key armaments in short supply. The more Israel needs, the less will be available for Ukraine. If it’s remotely possible to end the Ukraine war and focus more on the Middle East, the United States has to try.
The third factor is time, which Russian President Vladimir Putin thinks is on his side. Putin is banking on war fatigue building among Ukraine’s allies and political setbacks for Biden and other Western leaders who stand with Ukraine. Putin clearly hopes Donald Trump or another isolationist Republican will beat Biden in the 2024 presidential election and cut off Ukraine aid. Conflict in the Middle East will add to Western war fatigue, which is one more reason to intensify efforts to help Ukraine win, the sooner the better.
If Biden is truly ready to push Ukraine to victory, an important move would be a national address explaining to American voters why it’s worth spending billions of dollars of taxpayer money on Ukraine. After the Hamas attacks, Biden delivered a short but impassioned speech on why the United States will stand with Israel, which even critics praised as a galvanizing moment. He’s never made the case for Ukraine in the same way, which is puzzling, because it’s a solid argument: A small fraction of the US defense budget is helping Ukraine hack away at Russian military and political power, with no Americans in the line of fire. You almost can’t ask for a better deal.
Biden also needs to sketch what victory in Ukraine would look like. If Ukraine gets enough ATACMS, they could wreak havoc on Russian supply lines, harass Russia’s forces in occupied Crimea, and maybe even drive Russia’s Black Sea fleet out of the region. Ukraine’s other big ask is Western fighter jets, to help cover Ukrainian ground forces and launch other long-range missiles. Those may arrive in 2024, but Washington could certainly help speed up delivery, including the long logistical trains aircraft require. Without overpromising, Biden could tell Americans his administration is redoubling its effort to aid Ukraine because an increasingly dangerous world requires more American policing.
The best outcome for Biden would obviously be tangible results in Ukraine and a stabilizing Middle East by the middle of 2024, when voters are deciding whether he deserves another term. Biden may have more power to influence events in Ukraine than in the Middle East, where Iran and a hornet’s nest of fanatical militias routinely upend business as usual. Biden didn’t start either war, but American voters will judge him on the turns they take.
No comments:
Post a Comment