There is no gray area here. Vladimir Putin’s intentions and conduct identify a criminal of a rank given to the most egregious perpetrators of war and suffering that humanity has managed to once more retch forth. Now in a third year of war in Ukraine, Putin has committed his bewildered nation to a ruinous military campaign that has shamed it globally. That shame resides not only with Russia’s committed atrocities that continue to be chronicled but with the revelation that it actually lacks the competency to effectively execute a war. Adding to this embarrassment, Putin has resorted to threatening nuclear intervention to save himself from a much smaller non-nuclear foe that has outwitted his forces on both land and sea. All this comes in the face of a looming internal catastrophe shepherded in by a war economy that cannot be sustained.
Once it was recognized that Ukraine with its leadership would stand its ground, the United States (U.S.), its global partners and like-minded free nations of the global community stepped in to help. The support has provided Ukraine the ability to withstand Russia’s unjustified assault upon its sovereignty and to conduct its own defense without the commitment of forces of other nations against an enemy that threatens the current international order. The Biden administration, in particular, has led the effort, despite the drag of a faction of Republican congressional members who have committed themselves to a poorly conceived isolationist stance that variably either defends Putin’s regime or somehow fails to understand the worth of a stable U.S.-led, rules-based international order.
The problem with this war has been the inability to draw it to an end. Several have looked unrealistically to diplomacy as a more immediate solution hoping that a breakthrough of sorts can be made once it is realized that the war is simply costing too much. There is no evidence to think that Putin can be persuaded to step away without Ukraine ceding a large portion of its territory, a move that would threaten its viability as a nation. Such an outcome would also leave the matter of a future Russian incursion a reality in a world where guarantees are easily provided but seldom upheld. Moreover, such a gain for Putin would raise his stock among those authoritarians globally who have provided him support of one sort or another, a number of whom harbor opportunistic ambitions of their own.
This inability to effectively conclude Russia’s war and bring the misery that has been suffered to an end is attributable to the inadequate tactical decision-making of the West in providing the necessary armament to bear upon the enemy at the appropriate time. The incremental support provided by the Biden administration and European allies led to the suboptimal result attained in Ukraine’s 2023 counteroffensive. To worsen matters, the funding delay in the U.S. Congress in 2024 compromised Ukraine’s defensive operations when the Russians attacked its northeastern territory. Despite these readily acknowledged failures, the repeated calls by senior military leaders to act more decisively and the mounting concerns over Russia’s indiscriminate attacks upon civilian targets and infrastructure, this timidity of the West has persisted. The approach has denied Ukraine a reciprocal equivalency in waging war that has only fueled Putin’s further aggression and threats of retaliation. Whereas Russia continues to use North Korean and Iranian armament upon Ukrainian civilian locations, Ukraine is prohibited from using U.S. and European armament upon Russian military infrastructure.
That the West continues to provide advantage for Russia to conduct this war is a mystery. Aside from a flawed sense of fear of facing up to belligerent Russian rhetoric, is there actually a desire to wait out a protracted war with an adversary whose survival is dependent upon an outcome that the West itself cannot allow? Whether Putin remains in power or is forced to vacate his seat, is there a desire to see his regime press forward? And does a new international order dominated by authoritarian-led nations with self-centered interests seem like an appealing prospect for a world that faces a significant climate threat and environmental ruin, outsized and lethal future pandemics, transnational migratory pressures and mounting wealth inequality?
Russia’s defeat puts an end to the immediate concern of Ukraine, but it also brings opportunity to see the demise of a failed regime and another chance to reconfigure Russia’s leadership by well-intentioned Russians who see their nation regaining a moral standard that justifies its place in the global community. In a broader sense, such an outcome provides a warning to other repressive regimes who may contemplate similar unlawful behavior.
Copyright @Kost Elisevich, MD, PhD 2024. All rights reserved. Any illegal reproduction of this content will result in immediate legal action.
