As Sir Niall Ferguson has written, it is far too easy to ridicule President Trump and his Administration’s statements and policies on Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. Worse yet, Trump and those around him continue to make statements showing a failure to grasp the most elementary aspects of this war, e.g., that it is a war of aggression started by Vladimir Putin.
Beyond Ukraine: Russia Hides Imperialistic Demands
Nevertheless, those of us who believe this war engages the vital interests of the US and its European allies must continue to attack the “mass mind” of those who have argued that this is not our war or that Ukraine “has no cards,” or that it cannot win. Neither is it worth waiting for Vladimir Putin to indicate whether or not he will negotiate in good faith.
Here again, the answer is evident to all, for at the most recent session of “talks” with Ukraine, the Russian delegation presented what amounts to an ultimatum going beyond what it proposed at the original session. It demanded privileged rights for the Russian Orthodox Church, a centuries-old avatar of the Russian state’s imperialism, the Russian language, and elections as if Ukraine were a conquered province. Indeed, American officials expected this presentation.
Therefore, once again, we must endeavor to set the record straight. First, this is not only a war of aggression. Instead, it is an attempted genocide, and one cannot negotiate with genocidaires. The abduction of at least twenty thousand Ukrainian children, another centuries-old Russian tactic in war, indicates Putin’s true aims. Allowing such tactics to continue without punishment invites not just more foreign wars but also more genocides, i.e., not a destruction of the international order but of the fundamental global moral order.
And if we speak the complex, cold language of Realpolitik, it is no less vital from the standpoint of our geostrategic interests that Russia be defeated. Moscow, despite being fully engaged with Ukraine, is now demanding the stationing of 10,000 troops in Moldova’s breakaway Transnistria province that it controls while also trying to destabilize Moldova’s elections and intimidate it into surrender.
Were Moscow successful in achieving these results in Moldova, a territory that it has long coveted, it would hardly stop trying to increase its imperial reach at the expense of the Balkan states and European security more generally. Even as Russia launched its campaign of intimidation against Moldova, it interfered a great deal in Bulgaria, which has undergone eight elections in the last five years, in no small measure due to Russian influence activities.
Expansion Plans
Neither is the Russian threat confined to the Balkans. Numerous European governments and intelligence agencies have publicly voiced fears that because Russia has militarized its economy and government, within two-to-10 years, notwithstanding whatever the results of the present war are, Russia will be ready to attack them.
Even as our allies are now making visible progress towards enhancing defense capabilities, it is clear that it will take years of careful execution of their defense plans for Europe to be able to defend itself without US participation, assuming that to be the goal of the Administration. In other words, for the better part of the next decade, if not longer, we must be engaged, even if our role diminishes, in the defense of Europe.
Since we fought two world wars and the Cold War primarily to liberate Europe from the threat of authoritarian imperialism and geography has not changed, the defense of America against a recrudescence of that threat remains among our most vital interests.
This has been a vital interest since the days of the founding fathers, as any study of Washington’s foreign policy can tell us. Thomas Jefferson warned, for example, that a European empire would make England a “breakfast for Bonaparte” and a threat to the fledgling US. Today, allowing Ukraine to become Putin’s lunch would similarly threaten all of Europe and call the utility and viability of NATO into question.
But the threat does not end there. Even if China is the primary and pacing threat to the US. The best and cheapest way to thwart and deter the China threat is to beat Russia, i.e., offer Ukraine constant and unstinting support even as we rebuild our defenses.
Testifying before the US-China Commission, Elena Rybakova reported that without Chinese support, Russia could not afford to fight this war. Additionally, Russia would lack the necessary technology to conduct such operations. Towards the end of the Biden Administration, Secretary of State Blinken remarked about Chinese components, “Those are being used to help Russia on what’s an extraordinary crash course effort to make more munitions, tanks, armored vehicles, missiles. About 70% of the machine tools and 90% of the microelectronics Russia imports come from China.”
Thus, this war is arguably, fast becoming a proxy war for China against the West and a “reconnaissance in force” to probe the extent of Western fortitude, military and diplomatic capabilities. Therefore, the argument that Ukraine should be discarded in favor of strong anti-Chinese deterrence falls to the ground. Not only are we and our allies sufficiently capable, if motivated, to deter both Beijing and Moscow, beating Russia is arguably the best way to beat Beijing.
Trump and his team may persist in their delusions about not pressuring Putin, but if they do, they will soon confront a two-front challenge of even grander proportions than is now the case. And they will not be able to claim that they were not warned.
About the Author: Dr. Stephen Blank
Dr. Stephen J. Blank is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy Research Institute’s Eurasia Program. He has published over 900 articles and monographs on Soviet/Russian, U.S., Asian, and European military and foreign policies, testified frequently before Congress on Russia, China, and Central Asia, consulted for the Central Intelligence Agency, major think tanks and foundations, chaired major international conferences in the US and in Florence; Prague; and London, and has been a commentator on foreign affairs in the media in the US and abroad. He has also advised major corporations on investing in Russia and is a consultant for the Gerson Lehrmann Group. He is the author of Russo-Chinese Energy Relations: Politics in Command (London: Global Markets Briefing, 2006), and Natural Allies? Regional Security in Asia and Prospects for Indo-American Strategic Cooperation (Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College, 2005). Dr. Blank is also the author of The Sorcerer as Apprentice: Stalin’s Commissariat of Nationalities (Greenwood, 1994); and the co-editor of The Soviet Military and the Future (Greenwood, 1992).
