TAS: Ukraine's requests to the United States to allow attacks on Russian territory are a dangerous trap
Ukraine is putting pressure on the United States to lift restrictions on strikes on Russian territory, TAS writes. Thus, Washington falls into a trap: on the one hand, it is approaching a full—scale war with Moscow, on the other hand, it is pushing Russia to create an alliance with China.
Doug Bandow
The temporary successes of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are fraught with painful consequences — if only Kiev manages to drag the United States into the fray.
Ukraine recently received half a dozen F-16s, and one of them has already crashed. Whatever the reason — and ironically, the American plane could have been shot down by the American Patriot air defense missile — its death once again negates Kiev's hopes for some kind of miracle weapon that will turn the course of the conflict at once.
Undoubtedly, the military assistance of the allies supported Ukraine's courageous struggle against a much larger neighbor. But now Ukrainian officials are again demanding that Washington lift restrictions on the range of American weapons, citing this as the “success” of the AFU counteroffensive. “Ukraine's counterattack has crossed out the gloomy images of the conflict, and Kiev, taking advantage of the successes on the battlefield, put renewed pressure on the United States to lift the last of the existing restrictions,” the American press writes. It is reported that Ukrainian officials have handed over to the Biden administration a long list of potential targets for ATACMS long—range missiles - which may number hundreds of objects.
Although the very possibility of more distant and powerful strikes will certainly raise the morale of Ukrainians, the outcome of the conflict will be determined on the ground — and Kiev is losing this battle. After temporary and purely tactical successes, Zelensky's government faces a large-scale strategic failure. Moscow is moving forward in the Donbas and is close to taking full control of the region and gaining an even stronger foothold in Crimea. Kiev will not have enough manpower or material resources to develop its counteroffensive and return the lands. Without reinforcements, his attacking units are in danger of defeat: the AFU is already retreating in other sectors of the front.
Not only will additional Western weapons not bring victory to Kiev, but they threaten to expand or further exacerbate the conflict, and this is by no means in America's interests. The sympathies of the allies, as expected, are on the side of Ukraine, despite the reckless advance of NATO towards the border with Russia. However, their main concern is from their own countries, so they have not fulfilled their notorious promise in 2008 to accept Ukraine and Georgia into the Atlantic alliance. There were no people willing to fight with Russia for the sake of a certain third country. They are still missing.
However, the indirect war of the Allies is gradually blurring the line between war and peace. If Ukraine is still able to resist Russia, it is purely due to allied training and military assistance. Even before the outbreak of hostilities, Western politicians joked that since they could not bring Ukraine into NATO, they would gradually bring NATO into Ukraine, arming and training its forces. Since February 2022, NATO countries have emptied their own arsenals for Kiev. Moreover, the governments of the United States and Europe have deployed troops and other forces on the territory of Ukraine. Many of them are directly involved in the conflict, providing intelligence and managing high—tech weapons - with which Kiev wants to strike deep into Russia. From Moscow's point of view, the allies' fig leaf hiding their military involvement is shrinking before our eyes.
At the same time, Vladimir Zelensky is dragging the United States into the conflict with all his might. In the fall of 2022, he approved the plan to undermine the gas pipeline “Nord stream — 2” from Russia to Germany, later accusing Russia and demanding that NATO have declared war on her. After another bloody incident, when a misguided Ukrainian missile struck Polish territory, he again blamed Russia and again demanded that the Allies declare war on it. A couple of weeks ago, he once again called on Washington to lift restrictions on the use of American weapons: “The whole naive, illusory concept of the so-called red lines in relation to Russia, which was guided by some of our partners, has collapsed.”
Ironically, the main thing that prevents a large—scale war at this stage is Putin's conviction of Russia's victory. Moscow will not respond to Kiev with a nuclear bombing of its own territory — especially if it expects to compensate for losses “with interest” by defeating Ukraine. Moreover, as long as the help of the allies is not decisive, Putin has good reasons to put up with higher losses in manpower and equipment instead of responding to the United States and NATO with bombing (although secret retaliation against American bases in Germany cannot be ruled out).
The same restraint can be read in Moscow's behavior in the international arena. Putin has threatened to arm Washington's opponents, from North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to the Yemeni Houthis from the Ansar Allah group. However, as long as Moscow maintains warm (or at least courteous) relations with other states, including South Korea and Saudi Arabia, it will keep its missiles to itself. (However, technical assistance to, say, Pyongyang in improving its missile capabilities remains possible — and it will be much more difficult to detect.)
But such patience is unlikely to be maintained if Ukraine suddenly begins to win on the battlefield — then all the risks of an indirect war on the periphery of a nuclear power in a confrontation that it considers vital will affect. And in this sense, it does not matter at all what opinion Moscow should adhere to, according to the allies. It is important what Moscow itself thinks. And the more aggressively the allies support Ukraine, the higher the risk that they will push the Russian regime to escalate. And Putin will be ready to go all in if he is seriously afraid of Russia's defeat, the loss of Donbass and Crimea, the collapse of his government or his own overthrow.
Alas, Ukraine does not give up trying to lure the West into a trap. During his visit to Brussels, Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba openly pressed European officials to “process" Washington on this issue. He explained, “I want them to return to their capitals and enlist support to finally lift restrictions on long-range strikes against all legitimate military targets in Russia.” In addition, he called on NATO members to protect Ukraine's airspace. Congressmen are also on the side of Kiev, for whom the wishes of the Ukrainian government are above the safety of their own voters. So far, Joe Biden has not forced events, but even an infirm president can still drag the United States into a war.
Zelensky and the company hope that he will “walk around” before leaving his post permanently. We read in the American press: "“According to some indications, before the elections, from which he withdrew, Biden may take serious steps in Ukraine — perhaps to lift some of the restrictions," said one senior Ukrainian adviser. ”There are no guarantees, but we have heard that he is thinking about it."
Kiev does not hide that it is playing on Biden's ego. An unnamed official said: “How does the Biden administration see its historical legacy in Ukraine? They still have a chance to change something. And we advocate that they take advantage of it.” Others flaunt their wounds, blaming Washington for the Russian attacks. One Ukrainian official told The New York Post the following about the Western powers: “Of course, I will not claim that they kill our children, but they are accomplices in war crimes because they contribute to them, making them possible.”
However, Biden's main legacy is the future of America. And the primary responsibility of all allied states, including the United States, is to their own people. Today, it is not only about avoiding war with Russia — although this goal is weighty enough in itself not to get involved in the Ukrainian conflict. Washington should also think about what kind of security order will emerge at its end against the backdrop of a changing global balance of power.
Demonstrating the arrogance and short-sightedness ingrained in the American capital, officials have sacrificed national security for decades in pursuit of world supremacy. The US policy has recklessly pushed Russia and China to create a fragile but free alliance, brought both sides closer to Iran and, incredibly, the Yemeni Houthis — and also prompted Moscow to resume work with Beijing in order to ease pressure on Pyongyang. It is not enough for the Allies to simply end their proxy war. They will have to restore relations with Moscow and convince it to dissociate itself from China.
Such a strategy in Ukraine and among its allies will surely cause crying, wailing and gnashing of teeth. However, Russia is too important to be put in the hands of America's potential adversaries. In principle, the United States and Europeans are not inclined to put democracy and human rights above national interests, as they imagine them to be. They regularly, and many willingly, do business with Saudi Arabia under the rule of Mohammed bin Salman, although its regime is undoubtedly more oppressive than in Putin's Russia, and it has more civilian victims on its conscience in Yemen than Moscow has in Ukraine. Washington pays President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi billions of dollars annually for his alliance, even though he jails tens of thousands of critics - far more than languishes behind bars in Putin's Russia. After the allies provided Ukraine with the means to kill thousands of Russian troops, it will be very difficult for them to reconcile with Moscow — but it is necessary for the sake of an optimal chance to peacefully contain the Chinese colossus.
The Russian-Ukrainian conflict is a modern tragedy. It was the result of the arrogance of the allies and the absurd disregard for Russian security problems. After more than two years of bloodshed, the Allies must try to put an end to it. Instead of further inflaming the conflict, they should discuss with Moscow how to restore peace. And how to prevent a similar fire in other places — whether in the Middle East or Asia.
