The Russians are without precision-guided weapons. Ukrainians are running out of Soviet ammunition. The world is running on war. Biden management is losing ideas for its management. And the Chinese are taking care of everything meticulously New York TimesQuoted by Radar.
Supply of arms to UkrainePhoto: Sergei Subinsky / AFP / Profimedia Images
The shortcomings of Moscow’s arsenal are already evident on the battlefield for several weeks, a cause for long-term relief and short-term horror. Russia’s war machine, which spent a lot of money on Putin’s modernization, was relieved to be exposed as a paper tiger who could not create serious problems for NATO in the regular conflict.
This is very bad because the military, which is unable to wage a high-tech war, will do relatively little co-damage and conduct one with outdated technology, which causes the worst co-damage. Ukraine, by its own estimates, faces 20,000 deaths a month.
By comparison, the United States has killed about 36,000 people in Iraq in more than seven years of war. With all its courage and determination, Kiev could respect a neighbor three times as much in a battle – but not defeat.
This means that Ukraine should do more than slow down the Russian military. He needs to break his spine quickly.
But that would not happen in an artillery war in which Russia could drop about 60,000 bombs a day, compared to the 5,000 shells the Ukrainians claim they can launch. There is a saying that size has its own character.
Biden administration supplies advanced howitzers, rocket launchers and ammunition to Ukraine, but they are not getting there fast enough.
It is time for Joe Biden to tell his National Security Council what Richard Nixon told his alley when Israel was in trouble due to the losses in the Yom Kippur war.
After asking him what weapons the Israelis asked for, the 37th president ordered his deputy to “double” that amount: “Get out of here now and do your job.”
The urgent need for victory – or at least forcing Russian troops to retreat to a wider front, so that Moscow, not Kiev, demands peace – is compounded by the fact that time does not have to be on the side of the West.
Sanctions against Russia could have long-term damage to its economic growth potential. But sanctions have a limited effect when it comes to undermining Russia’s destructive potential.
The same sanctions cause damage to other parts of the world, and the price that other parts of the world are willing to pay for solidarity with Ukraine is not unlimited.
With significant shortages of food, energy and fertilizer, the inevitable disruption of supply and rising prices, democratic communities with low tolerance for such shortages will not be able to cope indefinitely.
Meanwhile, Putin does not seem to be paying much attention to his war, whether we are talking about energy revenues (rising with rising prices) or public support (which has also risen due to a combination of nationalism). , Propaganda and fear).
To believe that he will die soon, who knows what disease he will suffer from – Parkinson’s? “Leukemia”? Or the Napoleonic complex? – Can not take the place of strategy.
What else can the Biden administration do? It should take two calculated risks based on a particular innovative concept.
Calculated Risks: First, the United States must be prepared to challenge Russia’s maritime siege on Odessa, as proposed by retired Admiral James Stavridis.
Turkey will be forced to accept the passage of NATO warships across its seas across the Black Sea, which could include some undesirable diplomatic concessions to Ankara. But the danger of NATO warships being too close to Russian warships is even greater.
But legally, Russia has no right to block Ukraine’s largest port, no moral right to prevent Ukrainian agricultural products from entering the world market, and no naval force strong enough to measure itself with the US Navy.
Second, the United States must seize $ 300 billion worth of foreign assets of Russia’s central bank and fund the military and Ukraine’s reconstruction.
I proposed this for the first time in early April, and a few days later Lawrence Tripe and Harvard’s Jeremy Levine presented a convincing legal argument in this regard in an article presented by the New York Times.
Management does not like the idea, arguing that it violates U.S. law and could set a dangerous financial precedent – and would have been a firm argument in less dire circumstances. But now there is an urgent need for this kind of terrible financial blow that other sanctions have failed to take advantage of Russia.
This leads us to an innovative idea: the conflict in Ukraine will have a strong impact in Asia, not Europe. The administration will soon be able to convince itself that it has crushed the Russian army to such an extent that no one else can occupy it. That’s true – to a certain extent.
But if Putin stays in power and Russia occupies one-fifth of Ukraine and the war ends, Beijing will decide that the occupation will work. Then we will have a fight for Taiwan – with its huge human and economic costs – much sooner than we can imagine now.
Line drawing: A prelude or conclusion to the war in Ukraine. President Biden needs to do more than he has already done to ensure the second option is valid.
New York Times (Radar Acquisition)
“Evil gamer. Amateur music trailblazer. Alcohol geek. Problem solver. Coffee advocate. Troublemaker. Infuriatingly humble zombieaholic.”