'Indecision and failure to push back against Putin over the past decades has led to this crisis. For years, Western leaders acquiesced to Putin’s threats, bluster and bullying. As many Russia-watchers have argued for years, Putin’s threats are hollow. The tired notion that the West should avoid humiliating Putin — as French President Emmanuel Macron has said — has worked to Putin’s benefit. When faced with U.S. strength and resolve, Putin backs down. If we do not show serious resolve now, we risk enabling a new order in Europe that benefits autocrats and weakens democracy.''Defeating Vladimir Putin will reinvigorate democracy in central Europe and strengthen U.S. leadership around the world. Alternatively, the lack of a clear victory will leave the U.S. military bogged down in Europe in a weaker position, with a strained relationship with our allies and a reenergized Kremlin holding eastern and central Europe at risk. As outlined in a recent interview with Washington Post opinion columnist Mark Thiessen, Polish President Andrzej Duda commented: “It is very simple. … Right now, Russian imperialism can be stopped cheaply, because American soldiers are not dying. But if we don’t put a halt to Russian aggression now, ‘there will be a very high price to be paid.’”
..
Indecision and failure to push back against Putin over the past decades has led to this crisis. For years, Western leaders acquiesced to Putin’s threats, bluster and bullying. As many Russia-watchers have argued for years, Putin’s threats are hollow. The tired notion that the West should avoid humiliating Putin — as French President Emmanuel Macron has said — has worked to Putin’s benefit. When faced with U.S. strength and resolve, Putin backs down. If we do not show serious resolve now, we risk enabling a new order in Europe that benefits autocrats and weakens democracy.
Ukraine desperately needs ATACMS and other critical weaponry now, and Kyiv’s success will help reorder the security landscape to our benefit. Holding weapons in reserve for future contingencies is important, but not at the risk of losing a historic, strategic opportunity facing us today. President Biden alone can overcome Pentagon reluctance to part with such systems. The notion that providing Ukraine with 100 ATACMS, for example — which are due to be replaced by a newer system in the calendar year anyhow — would leave the U.S. military at risk appears short-sighted at this critical time.
Ukraine is a reliable ally. They were the third-largest provider of troops for the Iraq War and deployed troops to Afghanistan after 9/11. Ukrainian troops stood alongside U.S. forces during the chaotic withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Kabul airport in 2021.
It is time to demonstrate extraordinary U.S. leadership. Failure to provide Ukraine with the means to defeat raw tyranny could risk U.S. lives, alliances and economic prosperity, and signal to our enemies and adversaries that we don’t have the will to defend our core interests.'Why Biden Must Send Ukraine the ATACMS It Needs — NowBy Marc Polymeropoulos, John Sipher and Adam Kinzinger
August 29, 2023
SourceThe Biden administration’s assistance to Ukraine has been historic, providing over $43 billion and numerous weapon systems since Russia’s invasion in February 2022. Not only has the United States helped to save Ukraine from a Russian takeover, it also has reinvigorated the NATO alliance and led a worldwide effort to defend against outright aggression by the Kremlin. At the same time, however, President Biden’s national security team has exhibited a tendency toward incrementalism and timidity in providing weaponry. The White House eventually has agreed to send certain weapons systems, but only after painfully slow internal deliberation.
These delays have cost Ukrainian lives and allowed Russian forces to dig in and defend against Ukrainian counterattacks. According to the Washington Post, U.S. intelligence now assesses that Ukraine will not make the gains by the end of the summer that they originally anticipated. Unfortunately, disappointment seems to be contagious in Washington. Yet the grinding pace of the Ukrainian counteroffensive suggests that we are at a critical inflection point in the war, and the Biden administration risks allowing a foreign policy disaster in central Europe — perhaps even more consequential than the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. Worse, if that happens, it will be a defeat that was snatched away from a potential victory.
Defeating Vladimir Putin will reinvigorate democracy in central Europe and strengthen U.S. leadership around the world. Alternatively, the lack of a clear victory will leave the U.S. military bogged down in Europe in a weaker position, with a strained relationship with our allies and a reenergized Kremlin holding eastern and central Europe at risk. As outlined in a recent interview with Washington Post opinion columnist Mark Thiessen, Polish President Andrzej Duda commented: “It is very simple. … Right now, Russian imperialism can be stopped cheaply, because American soldiers are not dying. But if we don’t put a halt to Russian aggression now, ‘there will be a very high price to be paid.’”
The Biden administration must break the cycle of indecision, overcome bureaucratic or political roadblocks, and immediately provide Ukraine with the necessary weaponry to defeat the Russian army. The failure to provide long-range missile systems — such as ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile Systems) and delays in the provision of advanced aircraft such as F-16 fighter jets gives the Russian military an opportunity to dig in for the long haul. No matter what reason we offer for not providing Ukraine advanced weapons, Putin will read it as weakness. He will assume the U.S. is not truly invested in Ukraine’s future. If Ukraine’s independence were really in NATO’s core interest, why would Western leaders fail to provide Ukraine the means to win? Indeed, anything short of a Ukrainian and Western victory will empower Putin and his authoritarian allies.
To allow Putin’s troops to remain in Ukraine when the West easily could provide additional weapons will be seen as an avoidable and embarrassing defeat — and rightly so.
The Pentagon has resisted sending crucial weapons platforms. Earlier deployment of the Patriot missile defense system demonstrated just how effective even dated weapons systems can be against Russian attacks. Yet, as President Biden surely knows, a leader sometimes must break through bureaucratic obstacles. He did so on Pentagon intransigence regarding the Patriot, and must do so again on ATACMS.
The weapon system would provide a means to hit Russian command-and-control positions behind the front lines, which is critical to defeat the Russian army that relies heavily on top-down control. According to news reports, ATACMS are the last item on Ukraine’s shopping list. If Biden approves the systems for Ukraine, he will be insulated from the charges that, because of U.S. waffling, Ukraine is fighting the war with one hand tied behind its back.
Indecision and failure to push back against Putin over the past decades has led to this crisis. For years, Western leaders acquiesced to Putin’s threats, bluster and bullying. As many Russia-watchers have argued for years, Putin’s threats are hollow. The tired notion that the West should avoid humiliating Putin — as French President Emmanuel Macron has said — has worked to Putin’s benefit. When faced with U.S. strength and resolve, Putin backs down. If we do not show serious resolve now, we risk enabling a new order in Europe that benefits autocrats and weakens democracy.
Ukraine desperately needs ATACMS and other critical weaponry now, and Kyiv’s success will help reorder the security landscape to our benefit. Holding weapons in reserve for future contingencies is important, but not at the risk of losing a historic, strategic opportunity facing us today. President Biden alone can overcome Pentagon reluctance to part with such systems. The notion that providing Ukraine with 100 ATACMS, for example — which are due to be replaced by a newer system in the calendar year anyhow — would leave the U.S. military at risk appears short-sighted at this critical time.
We certainly can spare 100 from our inventory. We urge President Biden to send 100 ATACMS as a proof of concept, and to do this immediately. If necessary, include a provision that use of ATACMS must be restricted to Ukraine’s battlefields only and not for attacks inside Russia.
Ukraine is a reliable ally. They were the third-largest provider of troops for the Iraq War and deployed troops to Afghanistan after 9/11. Ukrainian troops stood alongside U.S. forces during the chaotic withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Kabul airport in 2021.
It is time to demonstrate extraordinary U.S. leadership. Failure to provide Ukraine with the means to defeat raw tyranny could risk U.S. lives, alliances and economic prosperity, and signal to our enemies and adversaries that we don’t have the will to defend our core interests.
Marc Polymeropoulos is an MSNBC contributor and is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. He worked for the CIA’s clandestine service for 26 years. His book “Clarity in Crisis: Leadership Lessons from the CIA” was published in 2021.
John Sipher worked for the CIA’s clandestine service for 28 years. He is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and a co-founder of Spycraft Entertainment.
Adam Kinzinger is a CNN senior political commentator and former Republican congressman from Illinois. He served 10 years on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. He is a lieutenant colonel and pilot in the Air National Guard.Context(Ukraine needs ATACMs) - '..Providing more aid to Ukraine .. could shorten the existing conflict.'(Ukraine needs ATACMs) - '..They haven't even asked Manufacturer to increase production.' - Ben Hodges'..Ukraine .. what they need now is a firepower boost with M26 cluster rockets''What are Ukraine's borders? .. they’re internationally recognized and defined in 1991.' - Navalny