The comments made by some individuals vying for political relevance in the coming presidential race seem to have little to do with the reality of global affairs and more to do with voter appeal. More qualified authorities with a sense of world history, current geopolitical dynamics, military strategy, trade relations, humanitarianism and national identity are better suited for comment than those who merely seek distinction with provocative soundbites that pretend to show wisdom. When an effective global effort is underway in which the United States has taken the lead to address a crisis, American resolve should not be looked upon by the world as time-dependent and its promises restricted to the duration of a single presidential administration. There can be no assurance than that the welfare of the international community, including that of America itself, is under consideration and can remain secure in the long-run. This is particularly the case, when authoritarian regimes figure themselves to have permanency and have intentions of forever securing that state-of-affairs by whatever means available to them despite what history has repeatedly taught us.
The case in point here, of course, concerns Vladimir Putin’s invasion of a sovereign nation, Ukraine, his genocidal intentions manifested by both his rhetoric and the actions of his military, his defiance of international rule-of-law and his disregard for the welfare of the world at large. For any U.S. presidential aspirant to reframe such behavior and circumstances as “a territorial dispute,” insufficient to warrant America’s attention, or to promote it as “genius” or “wonderful” suggests first to Putin’s Russia that it is on the right track toward not only achieving its desired end of subjugating a nation but, secondly, fulfilling a sorely outdated notion of national destiny and a reconstitution of empire. There are elements in American society now that have chosen to approve of this worldview, to appease the aggressor, a tyrant, and approve of his tactics as those of a strong, willful leader no matter the cruelty nor even the criminality. These sentiments are counter to the principals set forth within the U.S. Constitution and question their notion of democracy. Do these people actually prefer Putin’s Russia, a pariah state, with its rampant corruption, its restrictions upon individual freedom, its casual cruelty and a darkening future?
The arguments used to justify retreating from the conflict in Ukraine first land upon the need to preserve funds for domestic concerns of which there are many. These arguments are never balanced against the cost of giving ground to the invader with his intentions of continuing to work against the interests of the West and the U.S., in particular. Left unchecked, Russia’s actions globally challenge the security and economy of the U.S. in a manner that has manifested in the past, both recent and remote, and will continue seeking opportunity to do so more into the future. Hostile direct or indirect confrontation as with the recent drone incident over the Black Sea and the targeting of American military personnel by paid proxies during the war in Afghanistan will escalate in the face of increasing Russian belligerence. Increased intelligence surveillance is necessary to afford sufficient warning of imminent threats. Cyber-interference of American private industry and the electoral process has been an all-too-evident practice used in concert with other planned disturbances, sometimes military.
The Wagner Group, Putin’s private mercenary force, was established in 2015, initially as a paramilitary organization but now functions as a network of mercenary groups, corporations and quasi-state operatives. It has evolved into an operational tool implementing Russian foreign policy, executing military objectives and advancing private business ventures internationally. Both Syria and Ukraine are notable examples of armed intrusion whereas involvement in countries such as the Central African Republic, Mozambique, Libya and Sudan has been in the form of military training of either government forces or insurgent elements. In Venezuela, Wagner has provided security for Nicolas Maduro’s government as it faced political and social unrest as well as helped to secure Russian geopolitical and economic interests. In all ventures, the aim has been to establish dependencies and gain territorial and economic advantage. In so doing, Russia has come into competition not only with the U.S. but with China.
Russia’s threat to European security alone introduces another level of uncertainty for the global and U.S. economy because of trade disruptions and risks posed upon the European Union’s (EU) trade balance with the U.S. and other markets. The hosting of Ukrainian refugees, elevated energy and food prices and increased military spending have been felt throughout the EU and, in particular, by those countries near Ukraine and in the Baltic region. The long-awaited post-pandemic recovery was weakened, becoming more protracted. Consequently, inflation in Europe alone, which has been most vulnerable, climbed from 2.6% in 2021 to 8.4% in 2022, most of it attributable to the cost of energy and food. The U.S. has suffered greater inflationary pressures than would otherwise have been the case in the current climate with derivative effects notably within the housing market.
Inasmuch as foreign expenditure in support of Ukraine in the war, a common lament on the part of certain congressional members has been in the form of criticism of the amount spent by the U.S. to-date. The U.S. has indeed, provided more than $75B in assistance to Ukraine for military, humanitarian and financial support. Military spending comprised of security assistance and armament accounted for 61% of this sum. As a share of a nation’s gross domestic product (GDP), as of January 15, 2023, the U.S. ranks fifth with aid contribution, behind the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as well as Poland, those EU countries most threatened by Russian aggression. By example, Estonia and Latvia contributed a 1.07% and 0.98% share of their respective GDPs whereas the U.S. provided 0.37%, similar to that of Bulgaria and Norway which each provided 0.36% of theirs. Although large numbers of foreign volunteer combatants have provided military service on the battlefield, no country has been required to offer military personnel to the combat effort. Rather, those countries, particularly the U.S., have been able to measure the effectiveness of their armament against that of an invading force along with the tactical strategy implemented by an effective Ukrainian defense force with offensive capability.
The disastrous foreign policy initiatives of the previous U.S. administration with its underestimation of the value of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) served not only to threaten its survival as an effective bulwark against foreign aggression but would have seriously undermined the effort to withstand the current conflict. Weakening of NATO capability and resolve, had these policies continued, would have left Putin’s Russia to claim sovereign territory for its own and to proceed with an agenda threatening the Republic of Georgia to the east and the Baltic nations along with other eastern European nations from Poland to Moldova to the west. Even now, a former U.S. president, in his shameless pursuit of another term, claims to offer his sadly uninformed solution to the conflict by proposing that Ukrainian territory be given up. In doing so, he would reward an authoritarian leader for the crimes he has committed to acquire it. Thankfully, the International Criminal Court has at least called this out, enough so that some American politicians may allow themselves pause before giving support to a tyrant accused of international criminal wrongdoing with a well-documented list of committed atrocities. It remains for these same politicians to understand the meaning of the war that has been orchestrated by Putin as it pertains to international order and, likewise, for the United Nations to come to terms with a noncompliant pariah state within its own house and strip it of its authority.
Copyright @Kost Elisevich, MD, PhD 2023. All rights reserved. Any illegal reproduction of this content will result in immediate legal action.
