Putin’s main weapon is fear. If the West stops being afraid, then Ukraine will win: analysis of the end of the war
Is the West responding adequately to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine? Why is stopping Putin the main task of the USA, NATO and the EU? “Voice of America” collected the opinions of leading analysts, panelists at the Atlantic Council, who continue to discuss the results of the visit of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi to the USA.
“Stopping Putin’s aggression in Europe: it not only corresponds to American interests, but also corresponds to fundamental American values,” they believe Stephen Biegun (Stephen Biegun)US Deputy Secretary of State (US Deputy Secretary of State) in 2019-2021.
Pragmatism and values converge in support of Ukraine
Bigan’s wording refers to the old knowledge of American foreign policy: what should be its basis? Pragmatism? And then it simply has to meet the interests of the United States. Is loyalty to the principles of freedom and democracy? Then it must rely on traditional American values, sacrificing pragmatism if necessary.
Having in mind similar policies regarding the expediency of serious spending on military and economic aid to Ukraine, Steven Beagan claims that in this case, there is no contradiction in the war that Putin unleashed against sovereign Ukraine.
“Putin invaded the territory of a peaceful and democratic neighboring state,” says Bigan. – And it is not in the character of the American people to remain indifferent”
At the same time, according to the expert, support for Ukraine corresponds to pragmatic American interests: “President Zelensky correctly characterized our support not as charity, but as an investment of the United States in security. This is our investment in our own freedom and the world. The senator also spoke about it Mitch McConnellmaking it clear that the aid that the US provides to Ukraine is not a manifestation of altruism.”
If we do not stop Putin in Ukraine, he will move on to Europe
“We can say with absolute certainty,” Bigan continues, “that Putin is leading his campaign to the West as such to change the security architecture of Europe, subjugating it to its system. He would like to see the West as intolerant, venal, irredeemably corrupt as his own dictatorial regime. And if we don’t stop Putin in Ukraine, he will destroy further to Europe, as well as to other regions where America’s interests are represented.”
Putin’s most effective weapon is fear
According to the retired general Philip Breedlove (Philip Breedlove)the supreme commander of US and NATO forces in Europe (SACEUR) in 2013-2016, President Zelenskyi’s visit to the US demonstrated that there will be no winter stagnation in military operations, a respite that gave the Russian armed forces a chance to regroup for a new offensive.
A few days before the visit of the President of Ukraine to Washington, Putin visited Minsk.
Moscow is desperate to ensure that a new offensive from the north will be devastating
Speaking about the threat of Belarus entering the war, Breedlove noted skeptically: “In order to change the agenda, Putin is desperately trying to eliminate fear in the West – that a second front will be opened. Moscow is desperately trying to convince Zelenskyi and the whole world that a new offensive from the north will be devastating.
And while we must take the threat into account to some extent, we must first understand that Putin’s most effective weapon is fear. He really intimidated part of the West. And we should think about how to get out from under the shadow of this containment of fear and let Ukraine win the war. The brave people of this country deserve our support.”
“The worst way to deal with an invasion is to try to do something when it’s already in front of you and above you. We must warn the enemy outside of Ukraine.
It is necessary to strike at supply lines, routes of movement of enemy troops even before the invasion, and not after it
For this, it is necessary to make it possible to strike the supply lines, routes of movement of enemy troops even before they are deployed in battle formations.
I think that the USA is obliged to approve these tough political decisions, providing Ukraine with the following opportunities to launch such strikes even before the invasion of Russian convoys into the territory of Ukraine,” Breedlav formulated.
Putin is adding an army to advance
Stephen Hadley (Stephen Hadley)US National Security Advisor (US National Security Advisor) in 2005-2009, chairman of the international advisory board Atlantic Council International Advisory Boardalso considers a new attack on Kyiv very likely, especially against the background of the recently announced one-and-a-half-fold increase in the size of the Russian army.
It is in our interests to give the Ukrainians what they need now
In Hadley’s opinion, the West should help Ukraine organize its defense in advance, because the risks are great. In the event of the threat of the fall of Kyiv, the United States will face a difficult choice: to let Russia win or to take direct part in hostilities. And if the choice is to try the latter scenario, will it be done together with allies? How will NATO react? Europe? Especially considering the position of countries like Hungary? Will it be possible to rely on the UN resolution, despite the fact that Russia still has the right of veto in the Security Council?
To prevent such an acute scenario, according to Steven Hadley, it is possible to provide Ukraine with modern weapons in a quantity sufficient to reflect a new wave of Russian aggression.
“It’s in our best interest to do everything possible now, to give the Ukrainians what they need to be able to win in the event of any invasion, so if we don’t do that and Moscow’s offensive is successful, it will present the administration with a very difficult choice.”
Steven Beagan agrees with this.
“We have to act now so that Ukrainians can repel the Russian invasion from the north. More, better quality, faster, with a longer range – these four qualities are the wishes of President Zelensky for the supplied weapons.
The Armed Forces must be able to destroy any military formations that intend to attack them
We must pre-plan these shipments and ramp up defense proceedings here in the US to be able to bring this case to a close in the near future. Yes, there will be a separate conversation between the United States and Ukraine about targets in the middle of Russia.
But at a minimum, the US should approve and support Ukraine’s strikes on military targets inside Belarus if Belarus will use its territory or infrastructure as part of an offensive on its territory or to launch strikes against Ukraine.
The armed forces of Ukraine must be able to destroy any military formations that intend to attack them: this must become a priority.”
Means for a deep blow to the opponent
“I highly appreciate the actions of President Biden’s administration,” said Stephen Beagan. – They did the right thing at almost every step, however, half a step more fully. And now is the time to pick up the pace and overtake the Russians.”
The enemy still enjoys the opportunity to launch strikes across Ukraine from a sector of almost three hundred degrees
“We must give Ukraine enough means for a deep strike against the enemy,” the general believes, “because the enemy still provides the possibility of striking all over Ukraine from a sector of almost three hundred degrees, if we also evaluate the airspace of Belarus.
The measure limited Kyiv’s ability to fire back, thus allowing a safe haven for Russia. This is not a war I want to participate in as a commander…
We should work with our allies on a policy that allows Ukraine to do to Russia the same thing that Russia has been doing to Ukraine for almost a year.”
Stephen Hadley elaborates on this point with regard to the problems of negotiation and the counteroffensive in the South.
“The problem with a temporary ceasefire is that it effectively allows Russia to continue to sit freely in occupied territory, rearm its forces and resume invasion at any time it chooses.
The problem is that Putin has declared the occupied territories of a part of Russia non-negotiable, and this sent point makes negotiations virtually impossible for President Zelensky.
Ukraine needs military potential for a counteroffensive in Donbas
If Ukraine was given military potential for a counteroffensive on Donbas, and this would threaten the land line between Russia and Crimea, then the situation would begin to change and force Putin to look more realistically at the negotiations.”
In conclusion, Stephen Hadley joined the opinion of a viewer of The Wall Street Journal Russell Mead (Russell Mead).
“The war must end quickly. War must end in true peace: hostilities must not simply subside to resume later. The manner of ending a war should not be a reasonable preparation for the next one.
Russian aggression cannot go unpunished
The war must end in such a way that it becomes obvious that Russian aggression will not go unpunished. And the problem of negotiations arises in the fact that they make sense only when all these goals are achieved.”