Obama Must Show He’ll Use Military Means to Deter Russia in Ukraine

(The Daily Beast) – To deter Putin and other aggressors, diplomatic and economic slaps are not enough; the U.S. needs a military dimension.

Don’t pop the champagne corks just yet because Vladimir Putin phoned Barack Obama to pursue diplomacy on Ukraine and environs. It may be just a ploy, like Moscow’s proposal to denude Syria of chemical weapons to head off a potent U.S. air strike against President Assad’s forces. It may just be a gambit to tamp down the West’s drive toward greater sanctions against Russia. And all sinister explanations of the call gain weight by the fact that some 25,000 Russian troops still threaten Ukraine’s borders.

Even if Putin is serious about diplomacy for the moment, there is a deeper problem afoot for Obama. It is one that the White House rejects outright, but one that officials outside the White House and experts outside the administration are certainly fretting about. It is that Obama’s idea of combating aggression essentially by means of economic sanctions and “diplomacy” is not nearly enough, that the costs of aggression have to be raised, and that there has to be a stronger and more credible military dimension to U.S. national security policy. Whether the White House admits it or not, foes the world over seem to have concluded that Obama has taken the U.S. military force option off the table and made aggression easier.

In that vein, take a second look at what Obama said last Wednesday about a Russian attack on Ukraine: “Of course, Ukraine is not a member of NATO, in part because of its close and complex history with Russia. Nor will Russia be dislodged from Crimea or deterred from further escalation by military force.” That sounds awfully close to telling Putin that if he wants to grab more of Ukraine or all of it he need not worry about a U.S. military response. In effect, the U.S. president is saying that the only cost to Russia for totally violating the basic rules of international behavior is the threat of tougher sanctions (and this only if the Europeans and others can get their act together). Why on earth would Obama give Putin this virtual free ride?

Did the White House fear that unless the Ukrainians felt totally abandoned they might be foolhardy enough to actually precipitate a war with Russia? If this was the White House’s worry, Obama could have warned Ukrainian leaders publicly and privately that their only chance of help from the West was to make it absolutely clear that Moscow was the guilty party.

When Obama said that the United States would do nothing militarily to protect Ukraine against an attack, he was in effect walking away from the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 signed by Ukraine, Russia, Britain and America. By this paper, Ukraine gave back its nuclear weapons to Russia on a pledge by all parties not to violate Ukraine’s security and sovereignty. To be sure, neither London nor Washington was legally obliged to defend Ukraine if attacked. But it is perfectly obvious that Kiev never would have given up its nukes unless it believed the U.S. would come to its defense in some meaningful fashion.

The Budapest document makes sense historically only as a quid pro quo agreement resting upon American credibility to act. The United States cannot simply walk away from the plain meaning of the Budapest Memorandum and leave Ukraine in the lurch. And how would this complete washing of U.S. hands affect U.S. efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, supposedly a top national priority? Why should any nation forego nukes or give them away like Ukraine, if other nations, and especially the U.S., feel zero responsibility for their defense? It’s not that Washington has to send ground troops or start using its nuclear weapons; it’s just that potential aggressors have to see some potential military cost.

It’s bad enough that Obama thinks of the U.S. response to Russia in Ukraine almost exclusively in terms of diplomatic isolation of the bad guy, plus economic sanctions such as they are or might be, and a touch of military aid. But the real worry is that this has become his pattern worldwide.

If potential aggressors come to think that their power grabs will be met solely by diplomatic harassment and some economic squeezing, they will be tempted increasingly to snatch whatever they want first and worry later. Greedy lawbreakers have been  emboldened by Obama’s unenforced “red lines” in Syria. Same goes for North Korean rockets landing on South Korean lands without serious penalty. And the same holds for China’s new pattern of muscle flexing to establish its interests in the East and South China Seas. Ukraine only reinforces the pattern.

Economic sanctions are a good tool, but not a substitute for a credible military option. Even potent economic sanctions over decades have not brought Cuba, Iran, and North Korea to their knees.  Russia will be even more difficult to break with economic sanctions because it is the eighth largest economy in the world.

How can the U.S. add muscle in the present Ukraine crisis?

The boldest and riskiest course would be to dispatch 50 or 60 of the incredibly potent F-22s to Poland plus Patriot batteries and appropriate ground support and protection. Russian generals and even Putin surely know that the F-22s could smash the far inferior Russian air force and then punish Russian armies invading eastern Ukraine or elsewhere in the region.

There’s no sense at all in making this move unless Obama unambiguously resolves to use the F-22s. The worst thing to do is bluff. Nor would the dangers end there even if Obama were not bluffing; Putin might think he was bluffing anyway and start a war.  With all these complications and risks, the Obama team still should give this option a serious look—and let Russia and our NATO partners know this tough course is under serious consideration. Obama has sent a few F-15’s and F-16’s to Eastern Europe, some military aid to Ukraine and other states. But everyone knows this is tokenism.

Another plausible and perhaps less risky measure: help prepare Ukrainians for guerrilla war against an invading Russian force. Pound for pound in conventional war, the Ukrainian forces are no match whatsoever for the Russians. But irregular Ukrainian troops armed with first-class rifles, mortars, and explosive devices would do Russian troops great damage. Russians know this. They have surely not forgotten the horrors fighting guerrillas in Afghanistan.

These steps would be plausible, purely defensive, and a deterrent for starters. They would demonstrate to Moscow that further aggression against Ukraine would result in much more than economic and diplomatic slaps.  Credible force has been the missing ingredient in U.S. policy. Support for what might be the Ukrainian Resistance, combined with an F-22 deployment to Poland “to protect U.S./NATO security interests in the region,” should give Putin pause. And this approach would make the dictators in Pyongyang, Damascus, and Beijing think twice now as well.

[H/T DailyBeast: Leslie H. Gelb]

This Is How Obama’s Weakness In Ukraine Embarrasses America

(Western Journalism) – My, how the mighty have fallen under the stewardship of Barack Hussein Obama.

This weekend on CNN’s State of the Union, President Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser, Tony Blinken, revealed a shocking truth.

When asked about the impact of U.S. military assistance in Ukraine, Blinken said, “It’s very unlikely to change Russia’s calculus and prevent an invasion.”

Blinken is warning that the United States, a country that was called the world’s only superpower a few short years ago, is powerless to stop Russia from invading Ukraine. Worse yet, that means the United States is incapable of holding up its end of a treaty guaranteeing Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

The situation is desperate, according to Sunday’s AFP reports. Russian troops have consolidated Crimea’s annexation. A sweeping takeover of Ukrainian military bases in Crimea is basically over. The Russians met very little opposition.

Ukraine’s acting Defense Minister, Igor Tenyukh, lamented publicly about how his naval forces were ready to surrender to Putin’s Black Sea Fleet: “You know that in recent days, we have had our ships blockaded and seized, even though our commanders had the authorization to use force,” Tenyukh said. “Unfortunately, the commanders made decisions on the spot. They chose not to use their weapons in order to avoid bloodshed.”

So Barack Obama has decided to fly to Europe to huddle with leaders from Britain, France, and Germany. Up to this point, the sanctions imposed by this merry band of appeasers have elicited yawns and laughs from Russia. And wider economic sanctions are off the table because Russia has the power to dim the lights and lower the thermostats across all of Europe. Without Russian natural gas, Europeans would almost certainly face energy shortages.

That means the United States has no real options. If we actually airlifted troops into Ukraine to counter the Russian buildup, we’d likely be defeated by a stronger opponent on what is essentially its home turf.

A Plan of Action

Meanwhile, an even more threatening development is taking place in our own hemisphere, and it’s gone virtually unreported. Russia is moving advisers and arms, and generally increasing its involvement in Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. Cuba and Nicaragua were both flashpoints of contention with Russia during the Cold War.

Obama needs to make it clear to the leaders of these three Latin American countries that there will be grave consequences for deepening ties with Russia. If Russia wants us out of its sphere of influence, the United States must demand that Russia stays out of ours.

Next, we should do what we can to bolster the current government in Ukraine. Any money used to quickly strengthen the regime would likely be well spent. Yet Obama, who has repeatedly used his power to act unilaterally in domestic affairs, has let the bill to help Ukraine get bogged down in Congress over unrelated issues.

As Commander-in-Chief, Obama has the power to move defense policy through. He should order the Pentagon to immediately provide supplies to the Ukrainian military.

Finally, he should let Russia continue overextending itself financially. Russia has its own economic problems, and carrying Crimea won’t help. As Reagan administration official Dr. Donald Devine wrote recently:

“While President Putin may seem to be riding high about now, he has made a terrible economic mistake. Ukraine already subsidizes Crimea, and Russian parliamentarian Leonid Slutsky estimates it will cost his country $3 billion more in normal expenditures per year, and perhaps $20 billion over the next three years, ‘maybe even $30 billion,’ although he thinks it is worth the cost psychologically.”

Devine concluded that “a struggling Russia can’t afford it. Russian control of any more of economically bankrupt Ukraine would be an unbearable burden. Removing Crimea from Ukraine actually strengthens it. It saves Ukraine [from] paying the subsidies and, more importantly, removes 2,000,000 Russian-speaking citizens who normally vote against Western Ukrainian candidates, making it more likely for an anti-Russia majority to prevail for the foreseeable future.”

Over the longer run, America must get its own domestic and defense policies realigned. Welfare and healthcare overspending has hurt our ability to keep our defenses sound… And the first duty of the U.S. government is to keep its people safe and free.

[H/T WesternJournalism: Floyd Brown]

U.S., other powers kick Russia out of G8

The Hague, Netherlands (CNN) — President Barack Obama and other world leaders have decided to end Russia’s role in the group of leading industrialized nations, the White House said Monday.

The move to suspend Russia’s membership in the G8 is the latest direct response from major countries allied against Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

“International law prohibits the acquisition of part or all of another state’s territory through coercion or force,” the statement said. “To do so violates the principles upon which the international system is built. We condemn the illegal referendum held in Crimea in violation of Ukraine’s constitution.

“We also strongly condemn Russia’s illegal attempt to annex Crimea in contravention of international law and specific international obligations.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said earlier in the day that being kicked out of G8 would be no big deal.

“G8 is an informal organization that does not give out any membership cards and, by its definition, cannot remove anyone,” he said during a news conference. ” All the economic and financial questions are decided in G20, and G8 has the purpose of existence as the forum of dialogue between the leading Western countries and Russia.”

Lavrov added that Russia was “not attached to this format and we don’t see a great misfortune if it will not gather. Maybe, for a year or two, it will be an experiment for us to see how we live without it.”

Ukraine orders Crimea troop withdrawal

In a nod to political and economic reforms, the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, and Italy added Russia to their group in 1998 — transforming it from the G7 to the G8.

An aide to British Prime Minister David Cameron confirmed to CNN that a group summit initially planned for June in Sochi, Russia, where the Winter Olympics were just held, is now off.

The United States and its allies in Europe are “united in imposing a cost on Russia for its actions so far,” Obama said earlier in the Netherlands where he attended a nuclear security summit with other world leaders.

Western powers have imposed sanctions and other penalties against specific people in Russia close to President Vladimir Putin.

A senior Obama administration official, not speaking for full attribution, said Obama and other leaders agreed that further steps to punish Russian President Vladimir Putin could include sanctions on energy, banking and defense sectors — all areas where Europe is deeply engaged economically with Russia.

Those additional sanctions could be prompted if Russia further escalates its incursion into Ukraine, which the official defined as sending troops beyond Crimea into the southern or eastern parts of the country. Violence in the contested peninsula could also trigger further sanctions.

While the official said further penetration of Ukraine by Russian troops remains the most immediate source of concern for the United States, other potential land grabs also worry the United States and its allies.

NATO has expressed concern Russia could attempt to reclaim a region of Moldova with Russian sympathies.

Obama has said a military incursion in Ukraine is off the table, and his advisers are hesitant to even frame the crisis in Ukraine as a bad ’80s flashback — Obama in one corner, Putin in the other. It’s not “Rocky IV,” as Secretary of State John Kerry said.

White House officials don’t care to publicly muse about Putin’s intentions.

National Security Adviser Susan Rice said the Russian President’s actions speak for themselves.

The White House emphasis throughout the Russian occupation of Crimea has been “de-escalation.”

Asked whether the United States will provide military aid to Ukraine’s woefully underfunded armed forces, administration officials cautioned that such assistance could inflame tensions.

“Our focus has been and remains on the economic and diplomatic instruments at this point,” Rice said. “Our interest is not in seeing the situation escalate and devolve into hot conflict.”

Lavrov met with Kerry on Monday and said Russia’s action in Crimea was necessary.

“It was the necessity to protect Russians who live there and who lived there for centuries,” he said in the news conference. “And when our partners compare Crimea to Kosovo, because in Kosovo a lot of blood was shed then its independence was proclaimed. So we have a question then: Is it necessary for the blood to be shed in Crimea to agree on the right of the people in Crimea for self-determination?”

While Democratic and Republican lawmakers in the United States are stepping up their calls to provide Ukraine with light arms and other military aid, administration officials have argued that sanctions put in place so far must be given time to take hold.

With an estimated 20,000 Russian troops on Ukraine’s border, the question is whether Obama’s use of soft power will deter Putin.

With little resistance, the Russian President could easily move into eastern Ukraine even as Obama seeks to isolate Moscow in meetings with European allies. It’s a possibility not lost on senior administration officials.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican, argued the Russian leader is likely eying more opportunities in the coming days.

“(Putin) has put all the military units he would need to move into Ukraine on its eastern border and is doing exercises. We see him moving forces in the south in a position where they could take the southern region over to Moldova,” Rogers said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

There are other approaches. Obama’s former ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, urged the administration to intensify its policy of isolating Putin.

“Mr. Putin’s Russia has no real allies. We must keep it that way,” McFaul wrote in an op-ed in the New York Times.

[H/T CNN: Jim Acosta]

Russia imposes own sanctions after U.S. “hostile thrust”

(Reuters) – Russia imposed retaliatory sanctions on nine U.S. officials and lawmakers on Thursday as tension over Moscow’s annexation of Crimea mounted, warning the West it would hit back over “every hostile thrust.”

President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman said the U.S. sanctions imposed this week were unacceptable and that the Kremlin would act on the principle of reciprocity.

Three White House officials and five U.S. senators – Harry Reid, Robert Menendez, John McCain, Mary Landrieu and Dan Coats – were among the Americans barred from Russia, the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner was also on the list.

“We have repeatedly warned that sanctions are a double-edged instrument and would hit the United States like a boomerang,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said. “There must be no doubt: We will respond adequately to every hostile thrust.”

Moscow’s action followed U.S. sanctions on Russian, Ukrainian and Crimean individuals announced by President Barack Obama on Monday and again on Thursday.

The latest U.S. sanctions, which also involved a bank, targeted several individuals close to Putin in retaliation for his military seizure of Ukraine’s Crimea region. Any assets they have in the United States will be frozen and they will also be barred from U.S. travel.

“The appearance of some of the names on the list causes nothing but extreme perplexity,” Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. “But no matter what the names are, the practice of (issuing sanctions) lists is unacceptable for us.”

The White House officials cited by Moscow were senior Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer and deputy national security advisers Ben Rhodes and Caroline Atkinson.

Lawmakers in Washington were quick to welcome their new designation.

“If standing up for the Ukrainian people, their freedom, their hard earned democracy, and sovereignty means I’m sanctioned by Putin, so be it,” said Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

McCain threw in a bit of sarcasm.

“I guess this means my spring break in Siberia is off, my Gazprom stock is lost, and my secret bank account in Moscow is frozen,” said the Arizona Republican, who travelled to Kiev in December and addressed huge crowds of protesters against what was then Ukraine’s Moscow-backed government.

Peskov said the Kremlin was studying the latest U.S. sanctions list and Swiss-based oil trading firm Gunvor said it was assessing the impact of the inclusion of the company’s Russian shareholder Gennady Timchenko.

A Gunvor statement said Putin had no ownership, beneficial or otherwise, of the firm, and any understanding otherwise was “fundamentally misinformed and outrageous”.

Russian Railways, the country’s railway monopoly, said the decision to put its president Vladimir Yakunin on the U.S. list was unjustified.

(Additional reporting by Ludmila Danilova in Moscow and Patricia Zengerle in Washington; writing by Steve Gutterman, Doina Chiacu and Alexei Anishchuk; editing by Andrew Roche, James Dalgleish, Andrew Hay and Philippa Fletcher)

[H/T Reuters: Maria Kiselyova]

 

While Crimea Burns, Obama Golfs in Key Largo

(Breitbart) – Question: What does Barack Obama do while ineffectually dealing with the Russia and Ukraine fight over the Crimea, watching that region burn, and also ordering the cutting of funds for missile defense for Israel while enabling Iran to continue heading for nuclear bomb-making capability, thus heating the Middle East to the boiling point?

Answer: He goes golfing. On Saturday, Obama joined former NFL star receiver Ahnmad Rashad ,former NBA star center Alonzo Mourning, and Cyrus Walker, Valerie Jarrett’s cousin, to go golfing in Key Largo, Florida. Obama brought the wife and kids for a weekend getaway. White House spokesman Josh Earnest explained that Obama was relishing warm-weather downtime.

[H/T Breitbart: William Bigelow]

China Joins Forces With Russia Against U.S.

(Western Journalism) – As Russian military action escalates in the Ukraine, the weakness of American influence is being highlighted on the world’s stage. The White House reported this weekend that Russia is “in an occupation position in Crimea,” a Ukrainian peninsula reportedly being bombarded with more than 6,000 air and naval forces.

 

Secretary of State John Kerry is expected to visit Kiev this week to meet with Ukraine’s current leaders.

 

While American leaders offer rhetorical support for Ukrainian opposition forces, China has recently emerged as a Russian ally in the takeover.

 

Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, announcedMonday that he and Wang Li, who holds an equivalent position in China, discussed the ongoing occupation of Crimea, describing “broadly coinciding points of view” regarding the issue.

 

In addition to America and Canada, several European nations issued a statement indicating they “condemn the Russian Federation’s clear violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.”

 

William Hague, Britain’s foreign secretary, is already in Kiev and called the current action this century’s biggest European crisis.

 

“It’s impossible to be optimistic at the moment,” he asserted. “We’re not in any position to be optimistic about the security situation and what is happening in the Crimea.”

 

Russia, which has military capabilities that best the Ukraine in virtually all respects, is now further emboldened by its alignment with China. The Russian parliament authorized President Vladimir Putin to use force in the region Saturday, leading to an operation that took place as millions of Americans were watching the Oscar awards Sunday evening.

 

It remains to be seen what, if any, support China might offer in Russia’s action. Likewise, America has yet to offer any firm response to the ongoing dispute.

 

Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk remains defiant, however, insisting the nation will “never give up Crimea to anyone” and imploring Russian occupiers to leave the area.

 

Still, an alliance between China and Russia in any military operation is cause for concern around the world. As Trevor Loudon, a political activist and author from New Zealand, reportedin the recent Western Conservative Conference, both nations have hinted at both the capability and desire to potentially engage in military action against the U.S.

 

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is determined to continue shrinking American armed forces and driving up our national debt, making our potential retaliation to such threats woefully inadequate.

[H/T Western Journalism: B. Christopher Agee]