What If Putin Wins the War in Ukraine? Part 2
This article is the second part of our discussion of the war in Ukraine. We published Part 1 earlier this week.
U.S. Blocked Planes for Ukraine
Early in the war, the Polish government came up with a brilliant idea to help Ukraine. The Poles offered to give Ukraine 28 MiGs, Soviet-era jet fighters. In return, they proposed that the U.S. provide Poland with new U.S. jets. The swap would be a major boost for the Ukrainian air force, which had only 55 MiGs at the time. (Ukraine has probably lost many in combat since then.) The exchange would enable the Poles to modernize their air force and deploy NATO-compatible planes.
The swap could have been carried quickly. Since the Ukrainians already flew MiGs, their pilots did not need more training. There would not have been any logistical delays, because the Poles would transfer planes that they already owned.
But the U.S. shot down the plan. Why?
Putin’s Nuclear Blackmail Is Working
In a brilliant example of psychological warfare, Putin has used his threats of deploying nuclear weapons to intimidate the U.S. and NATO. They have essentially let Putin dictate the terms of engagement, limiting Ukraine’s ability to strike back at Russia. This is a recipe for defeat in Ukraine.
For months, Russian forces have fired missiles and artillery at civilian as well as military targets across Ukraine. They are destroying infrastructure, killing civilians and weakening Ukraine’s defenses with these massive attacks. Since the units are based in Russia, they have not suffered any damage, because the U.S. and NATO still refuse to provide planes to Ukraine. For Putin, it is a fine way to wage a war.
The U.S. and NATO have justified their refusal on several grounds. It takes time to train pilots; maintenance is difficult; and the allies don’t want to draw down their own stockpiles of weapons. The NATO allies used the same arguments as they dithered for months about providing tanks. Although there are certainly logistical challenges involved with delivering such heavy weapons, that is true in most wars.
What is the real reason the U.S. and NATO are balking at providing jet fighters? They undoubtedly worry that if Ukraine were equipped with more planes, its air force would strike at installations in Russia. The NATO allies fear such attacks might provoke Putin and lead him to retaliate with tactical nuclear weapons. The Russian leader may be bluffing, but they are not willing to call his bluff. That fear may also be also why the U.S. and its allies have declined to give Ukraine long-range missiles that could hit targets in Russia.
Why is Vladimir Putin Smiling?/Getty Images
Repeating the Mistakes of Afghanistan
But why shouldn’t Ukraine be allowed to attack targets in Russia? Otherwise, Ukrainian civilians and soldiers will remain sitting ducks, as the Russians pound them with impunity. How can Ukraine possibly defeat the Russians if it fights under such constraints? How long will morale hold up among its civilians?
The U.S. made similar mistakes during the war in Afghanistan. The U.S. allowed the Taliban to use Pakistan as a haven, out of fear that if American forces attacked them inside that country, they might provoke the Pakistanis to do …something bad. When U.S troops got too close, the Taliban simply took refuge in Pakistan.
It’s a losing proposition to fight a war on your enemy’s terms.
The “Humanitarian” Argument
The realpolitik pundits like Douthat and Caldwell argue that the US should “encourage” (force) the Ukrainians to negotiate with the Russians, in order to stop the bloodshed. In their view, the Ukrainians should accept the fact that they have lost Crimea and that the Russians will also gain the Donbas region.
They may have a valid point about Crimea, where pro-Russian sentiment was very strong before Putin seized it in 2014. But since the 2014 invasion, most Ukrainians living in the Donbas have shown no desire to live under Russian rule. The Donbas separatists only seized a small sliver of the region in 2014. In fact, they needed help from Russian soldiers to avoid total defeat by the Ukrainian army.
Although the Donbas represents only about 8% of Ukraine’s territory, it is a crucial part of the Ukrainian economy. The Donbas region, rich in coal, contains much of Ukraine’s industrial heartland. (Or at least the Donbas did, before Russia laid most of the region to waste.)
That is, of course, precisely why Putin wants to get all the Donbas…to enrich Russia and to impoverish Ukraine. Without the Donbas, Ukraine would be a smaller, much weaker country. Would Ukraine be a viable nation without the Donbas? It’s not clear.
Would the Bloodshed Stop?
And if Russia were allowed to take control over all of Donbas, would that really avoid more bloodshed? Or would the Russians massacre the local populace, as they did in towns like Bucha and Irpin in northern Ukraine, during the first months of the war?
If anything, the new recruits may be even less disciplined than the first wave of invaders. Russian soldiers are undoubtedly very angry about the huge casualties that their army has suffered. They might well seek revenge by killing innocent civilians.
Finally, why should we assume that Putin would be satisfied if the Russians won control of all Donbass. Why wouldn’t he try to conquer all of Ukraine?
Russia Can Stay the Course
The next phase of the war will probably be very difficult for Ukraine, and it may suffer some defeats on the battlefield.
Russia has three times as many people as Ukraine, which is a key advantage. Over the last several months, its generals have sent waves of troops, many of them former convicts, to wear down Ukraine’s soldiers. The Russians have suffered massive casualties, but they are accomplishing their goal of weakening the Ukrainians’ defenses.
Now, Russia is preparing to launch a major offensive soon with its newly conscripted soldiers. Ukraine does not have such additional reserves of manpower, since it has already drafted virtually all able-bodied men.
Russia Gets Around Sanctions
Russia’s war machine remains intact, and Putin can easily finance his war. Western sanctions have not reduced Russia’s revenues from oil and gas. India and China have stepped up their purchases of Russian energy products, which has offset the drop in sales to Europe.
Russia has also found ways to circumvent the sanctions that were supposed to deprive it of the computer chips and other technology needed to construct modern weapons. For example, Russia has used Iranian drones to devastating effect. The drones contain many parts manufactured in the U.S. Russia has also been able to source chips, which have supplied by Chinese firms skirting the sanctions.
Meanwhile, the Ukrainians are essentially fighting with their hands tied behind their backs, without planes or tanks.
Next Steps for the US and NATO
So, what should the US and its NATO allies do? They should equip Ukraine with as many tanks and jet fighters as possible. They finally reached a consensus on providing tanks after much haggling, but the tanks might not arrive for several months. Now the U.S. and its allies must provide aircraft as well as tanks, and quickly.
When U.S. officials talk about the logistical problems, such as training Ukrainians to fly U.S. jets or dealing with supply bottlenecks, just ask yourself this question: Would American generals send troops and tanks onto a battlefield without air cover? Of course not. One of the U.S.’s key advantages is that its military leaders are highly skilled in using a combination of infantry, armor and airpower to attack an enemy.
Admiral James Stavridis (Ret.), the former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe, recently emphasized that jet fighters are critical for Ukraine’s success on the battlefield:
“While the addition of the tanks is crucial, combat airpower may ultimately be decisive. Having spent years as supreme allied commander of NATO studying European war plans and the history of tank warfare on the continent, I can’t imagine operating that armored force without sufficient air cover.” (“Ukraine Desperately Needed Tanks. Now It Needs Planes”. Bloomberg News, Jan. 31, 2023)
Preventing a New “Evil Empire”
Providing Ukraine with tanks and planes is not reckless “escalation” on the part of the U.S or NATO. This is giving an outmanned and outgunned democracy the weapons it needs for self-defense against a brutal dictator.
And it’s the best way to keep a despotic leader from realizing his dream of restoring the Soviet Empire. Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Green and the other ultra-MAGA politicians would do well to recall the words of another Republican leader, Ronald Reagan. He called the Soviet Union “the Evil Empire”.
The Wall Street Democrat