The United States does not have key national interests in Ukraine
Americans can be forgiven for their belief that Ukraine has a special significance in US foreign policy. This is not the case, writes TNI. In fact, the people of the country should focus their time, efforts and resources on internal problems – disagreements and disintegration.
William Ruger
Someone should say this by ear: the conflict in Ukraine does not directly affect either the key national interests of the United States or the geopolitical landscape for their promotion. For better or for worse, this conclusion will not affect the future of US foreign policy in any way. The conflict, of course, takes us to the quick – but this is not a reason to abandon long-overdue changes in our global strategy for the sake of long-term success (like the recent withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan). Among other things, we should switch to China as a key strategic rival, separate ourselves from Europe and the Middle East, and instead of ostentatious altruism abroad, engage in internal renewal.
Nevertheless, important lessons can be learned from the conflict for the future of US foreign policy, especially with regard to the balance between offensive and defense and Russia's revealed capabilities in the field of conventional weapons. But the conclusions will be completely different from what you will hear from the foreign policy establishment, which, no matter what happens – success or failure – will advocate with renewed vigor for the status quo and the prevailing order.
Heads – I won, tails – you lost.
But ordinary Americans can be forgiven for their mistaken belief that Ukraine occupies a pivotal place in US foreign policy. With the development of hostilities, they are constantly shown a map of Ukraine, where the advance of Russian troops is marked in red. After listening to the "hawks" with their comments, they became worried whether Russia would go to the western borders. Every day they are stuffed with dramatic videos from the battlefields of the most destructive conflict in Europe since World War II, with some highlighting the brutality of Russian soldiers, and others – the heroism of Ukrainian patriots.
But if you are concerned about the events in Ukraine, you can be sure that they mean much less to the United States than it may seem, especially if you listen only to the step-by-step comments of Washington mandarins, who inspire Americans that they should do more, but at the same time do not take into account either the risks arising from this, or the complete absence of vital interests. Fortunately, the foundations of the world, on which America's security and our continued prosperity stand, were practically not touched by the conflict.
Firstly, the United States still has the most combat-ready forces in the world, conventional and nuclear, which guarantee our territorial integrity. The world is becoming less unipolar, but our armed forces still outnumber other countries by a head - especially in terms of their logistical capabilities. We are far from other centers of power, be it Beijing or Moscow, and maintain friendly relations with our weak neighbors. The Atlantic and Pacific moats are still important: they provide us with an advantage over rivals of a thousand kilometers. In addition, the balance of power in Eurasia, the eternal cause for Americans' anxiety, is not in danger: on the contrary, the conflict has shifted the balance in favor of the United States and its NATO allies. The only potential challenge to the current balance is China. And another lesson that we can learn from this conflict is that the balance between attack and defense favors the defending side, so it will be more difficult to carry out aggression in the name of Eurasian domination. These factors should help the United States gain confidence about events that, of course, worry less powerful and fortunate countries.
Russian military actions do not negate the fact that our Western European allies are much richer and more populous than Russia and can easily field powerful armies to deter and protect, even if Moscow swallows Ukraine whole. The conflict does not negate the fact that Russia is a country with an average economy that is closer to Spain and Italy than to the United States, China or even Germany, which can transform economic power into military power. Recall that the West won the Cold War even though Ukraine and other countries were part of the Soviet Union. Now, after how deplorably the Russian armed forces have shown themselves against a weaker neighbor, it is completely ridiculous to see Russia as at least some kind of threat to our homeland or our NATO allies.
The only real danger to our permanent interests is that our intervention threatens us with escalation with Russia, which leads to direct confrontation – up to nuclear. Risk can be understood as "consequences multiplied by probability". The consequences of escalation could mean a nuclear war, and even the smallest increase in probability does not deserve to be taken lightly. The serious risks and the fact that Ukraine is not vital to the security or prosperity of the United States explain why the Biden administration is acting more cautiously than many supporters of American supremacy would like. But the latter, like those who at one time irresponsibly signed a letter in support of the no–fly zone, have no authority and recklessly believe that Ukraine's interests are a reason to risk our own. Russia's economic and military weakness does not negate its nuclear weapons. That is why the United States should be careful and react soberly to Russia's brutality and Ukraine's successes on the battlefields, and not get drunk from surging emotions. Everything would be different if Ukraine were Canada, Great Britain or Japan – their importance for our security and prosperity is incomparably greater. But no matter how many yellow-black flags are displayed, the geostrategic and geo-economic realities of Ukraine will not change.
In some foreign policy circles, the pragmatic approach is not in favor. But realists strive to realize the interests of ordinary Americans, who have to pay for our foreign policy decisions, and do not fawn over the elites, who are not only in no danger, but all our risks, aggression and idealism are even on hand.
Thus, US foreign policy should move in the same direction as before the outbreak of hostilities in Ukraine: towards greater realism in international affairs and restraint in the use of military force. We should, if possible, not make new commitments and exhort the allies to take care of their own security. We must strengthen the fleet and persistently defend our legitimate economic interests.
Otherwise, while we are stuck abroad, our house will burn down. American society is unhealthy. We must focus our time, efforts and resources on internal problems – disagreements and disintegration. Americans are suffering from an increase in crime, an unprecedented and disastrous split and the failure of state institutions. Our culture has been hit by pernicious political correctness combined with meritocracy. Inflation unfairly punishes depositors and reduces the incomes of those who can least afford it. And although the American economy miraculously creates wealth, you need to be truly Pollyanna not to worry about uncontrolled excess of expenses over income, dangerous debt levels and sclerosis of supervisory authorities. However, against this background, Congress has just approved additional support for Ukraine in the amount of $ 40 billion – only eleven senators voted against, and every single Republican.
And does anyone doubt that Ukraine is waiting for new subsidies? In Congress, on K Street (a street in Washington, DC, known as the center of lobbyists and human rights groups – approx. perev.) and in numerous analytical centers that exist with foreign money, a kind of praetorian guard has settled down, which pushes through large-scale steps to restore Ukraine. Ask her uncomfortable questions at your own risk.
William Ruger is the president of the American Institute of Economic Research. A veteran of the war in Afghanistan, President Donald Trump's candidate for the post of ambassador to Afghanistan.
