Posts tagged as “President Biden”

Does President Biden Understand What Is at Stake in Ukraine?

Does President Biden Understand What Is at Stake in Ukraine?

By John R Guardiano on March 13, 2022

His weak leadership and wishful thinking undermine America, Ukraine, and the free world.

Has America ever had a weaker, less serious, and and more reactive President at a time of war than we do now with Joe Biden at the helm?

He has been forceful and emphatic about what he does not want and will not allow—”World War III“—but fuzzy and inarticulate about American objectives in Ukraine. And, each and every step of the way he has been dragged into taking necessary action—by the Europeans (economic sanctions), the Ukrainians (military arms shipments), and the Congress (sanctions on Russian oil).

Mr. Biden is following, not leading.

Yes, this is the Russo-Ukraine war and America is a non-belligerent; however, we are not neutral. America, NATO, and the free world have a clear interest in the outcome of this conflict.

We are on the side of Ukraine; its courageous President, Volodymyr Zelensky; and the Ukrainian people. And we ought to seek to discredit and defeat the Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin.

Why? Because Putin’s Russia threatens peace and stability in Europe, the rules-based international order, and American interests worldwide. Russia is too big and too important a country to ignore. Its misrule and outlaw status cannot be abided and mustn’t stand.

Yet, Mr. Biden never really says this. Instead, he appears more fearful of provoking Russia than in deterring Russia. He appears more eager to court Putin for help with his misbegotten Iran nuclear deal than in stopping Putin’s reckless war in Ukraine.

The President was tactically wise, in the run-up to the war, to loudly announce Putin’s moves before they happened. This helped to frustrate the Russian dictator by effectively denying him any pretext for his wholly unprovoked military assault on Ukraine.

But Mr. Biden appears not to grasp the strategic significance of the Russian invasion and the need for American leadership at this critical hour of maximum danger.

Instead, he appears bothered that Ukraine is diverting him away from his cherished domestic policy agenda and the need to “build back better” with “green energy.”

Sorry, but as Richard Hass points out, an American president doesn’t get to “choose his in-box,” or the issues that historical fate thrusts upon him and the nation.

Wartime Presidential Leadership. Indeed, Lincoln did not seek or choose the Civil War and Harry Truman did not seek or choose the Cold War or the war in Korea. Yet, both Lincoln and Truman recognized that these wars could not be ignored or downplayed; they had to be confronted—and American leadership was a moral and geo-strategic imperative.

We are at a similar historical inflection point with Putin’s brazen assault on Ukraine. As Eli Lake observes:

We are living in a different world now. In the new world, Putin’s Russia is not part of the community of nations. It is a threat to the community of nations.

Consequently, the international system created after World War II must be revised. The free world is again engaged in a cold war with a country whose capital is Moscow.

⁩Mr. Lake outlines a long-term strategy to defeat Russia, as well as Russia’s ally and enabler, Xi Jinping’s China. He recommends, among other things, that the West pursue a policy of “economic separation” from both China and Russia.

“Energy independence and new supply chains are two crucial elements when it comes to protecting the free world’s economies from China and Russia,” Lake writes.

Unfortunately, energy independence is the furthest thing from Joe Biden’s mind. When he came into office he announced, essentially, a war on fossil fuels: “shutting down pipelines, denying new drilling permits and promising a renewed regulatory and tax attack on any who dare to drill.”

Predictably, this has driven up the price of oil and made America more dependent upon foreign sources of energy. Yet, Mr. Biden says that “transforming our economy to run on electric vehicles powered by clean energy… will help.”

This is a pipe dream that ignores the current political and economic realities.

Electric Vehicles. It is conceivable, though highly unlikely, that ostensibly clean electric vehicles will replace gas-driven automobiles decades from now. But in truth, the United States—as well as every other country on earth—is dependent upon fossil fuels, and this won’t change anytime soon.

Mr. Biden is in denial. Worse yet, his thinking is divorced from reality; and, as a result, he is not leading.

Mr. Biden must do better because America, Ukraine, and the free world need much better. We need a serious wartime president who understands what is at stake in Ukraine and why America must lead. Now.

Featured photo credit: Screenshot of Joe Biden speaking from video on his Facebook page.

Should the West Worry about Putin’s ‘Red Lines’ or Its Own?

Should the West Worry about Putin’s ‘Red Lines’ or Its Own?

By John R Guardiano on March 10, 2022

America and NATO need to focus on what they will do to defeat and discredit Putin.

The commentariat has been fiercely debating whether to impose a “no-fly zone” over Ukraine. This is an interesting tactical question that is worthy of debate; however, the more fundamental and important question is strategic:

Do America and NATO wish to defeat and discredit Putin in Ukraine, or are we simply looking to “deescalate tensions” and give Putin an “off-ramp” so that he can “save face”?

Unfortunately, too many in the West are intent on trying to appease Putin instead of defeating and discrediting him. Their ostensible reason for doing so is to “stop nuclear war” (the New York Times’ Ross Douthat) or at least prevent a wider war (U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken).

Off-Ramps. Of course, as is becoming increasingly clear, Putin himself has absolutely no interest in any “off-ramp” or “deescalation of tensions.” The Russians have willfully violated ceasefire agreements even as they deliberately target civilian population centers and commit war crimes.

The Washington Post reports:

“It’s important to remember that throughout this crisis created by Putin and Russia, we’ve sought to provide possible off-ramps to President Putin,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters in Washington on Wednesday.

“He’s the only one who can decide whether or not to take them. So far, every time there’s been an opportunity to do just that, he’s pressed the accelerator and continued down this horrific road that he’s been pursuing.”

Exactly. “Off-ramps” and “face-saving measures” are useless if Putin has no interest in that. They also are dangerous and provocative because they communicate weakness and a lack of resolve.

Nuclear War. Indeed, contra Douthat, a nuclear conflagration in Ukraine is more likely to result if America and NATO are not crystal clear about what will invite a devastating Western response.

For this reason, the West needs to draw its own “red lines” involving unacceptable Russian behavior and actions. Otherwise, Putin may be tempted to test fate—and us.

Instead, though, the Biden administration, and Western policymakers in general, have been obsessed with Putin’s red lines, real and imagined, and with what Eliot A. Cohen rightly calls, “self-deterrence”: explaining in detail what we absolutely will not do.

For example: we will not deploy ground troops; we will not deliver MiG fighter jets; we will not conduct long-planned nuclear tests; we will not impose a no-fly zone; we will not sanction Russian oil (until we did two days ago)…

As the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board puts it: “Instead of deterring Mr. Putin, Mr. Biden is letting the Russian deter the U.S.”

This is, needless to say, self-defeating. As Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) explains:

There’s a sentiment that we’re fearful about what Putin might do and what he might consider as an escalation. It’s time for him to be fearful of what we might do.

The only way to get Putin to act in a way that may be able to save lives of Ukrainians is if he fears us more than we fear him…

He’s got to think about what happens if he provokes us: because they [the Russian military] could be obliterated by the forces of NATO.

Exactly. The Russian military has been exposed in Ukraine as subpar and not at all ready for prime time. Their operations have been slow, plodding, disjointed, unimaginative, and utterly unimpressive.

U.S. officials estimate that, in these first two weeks of fighting, as many as 6,000 Russians have been killed. In its nearly two decades in Afghanistan, by contrast, the United States lost fewer than 2,500 soldiers.

In fact, because of the skill and tenacity of the Ukrainian military, as well as the courage and spirt of the Ukrainian people, the prospect of a strategic Russian defeat is likely—even if, as still appears probable, Russia ultimately wins a short-term but pyrrhic military victory and conquers Ukraine.

The West should relish the opportunity to defeat and discredit Putin. For two decades now, he has been a clear and present danger to the rules-based international order worldwide and to peace and stability in Europe.

Under his reign, Russia has waged war on its neighbors and threatened free and sovereign nations throughout Eastern Europe and Eurasia. Ukraine should be a wakeup call not to find a way to accommodate Putin, but to force him from power by making his position untenable.

Russia can have a new leader and a new leadership class. That is desirable and possible—but only if America and NATO stop self-deterring and worrying about Putin’s “red lines,” real and imagined.

Instead, the West needs to focus on its strategic, wartime objectives: a free, sovereign, and independent Ukraine; the withdrawal of all Russian troops from Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia; and a new Russian government that respects international law and the territorial integrity of its neighbors.

This, in turn, will require a focus on deterrence and drawing our own inviolable “red lines.”

Featured photo credit: Screen shot of Senator Mitt Romney (R-Utah).

Biden Should Use his State of the Union Address to Declare Economic War on Russia

Biden Should Use his State of the Union Address to Declare Economic War on Russia

By John R Guardiano on February 26, 2022

America and NATO have the means to force Vladimir Putin from power and reverse the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Note: President Biden is scheduled to deliver the annual State of the Union Address to Congress Tuesday, March 1. In light of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, here is what the President should say.

Madam Speaker, Madam Vice President, members of Congress, my fellow Americans, and concerned people across the globe, especially the brave people of Ukraine:

This evening, I was planning to deliver the annual State of the Union Address. However, you will forgive me for parting from tradition and doing something different.

Tonight, I would like to address a much more pressing and urgent matter: the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the response from America, NATO, and the free world.

Russian Invasion. As you know, last week, Russian dictator Vladimir Putin launched a wholly unprovoked military assault against the free and sovereign nation of Ukraine. Putin’s aim: to conquer and subjugate Ukraine and make it an indissoluble part of a new and more expansive Russian empire.

America and its NATO allies have armed the Ukrainian military and we will continue to do so. A free and sovereign people deserve the right to fight for themselves, to fight for their freedom and independence. The United States of America will never be indifferent to their pleas for help and to the cause of liberty.

However, we will not wage a military war against Russia. We will not send American ground troops to Ukraine.

The time to do that, candidly was a year or more ago, before Russia invaded, when U.S. troops could have deterred Putin and prevented this military war from happening. That opportunity, sadly, has been lost.

But while a traditional military war in not something we will partake in, we will embrace every measure short of armed conflict, and short of “boots on the ground,” to ensure that Ukraine remains a free and sovereign state.

This means that America and NATO are launching an economic war against Russia. Our aims are clear and just:

First, as I mentioned, we will arm the Ukrainian people with as much military aid as possible as quickly as possible. America once again will be the arsenal of democracy, and our support for the brave people of Ukraine will continue for as long as they wish to fight.

Second, we will destroy the Russian economy through economic boycotts, sabotage, and cyberwar. This is necessary to force Russia to change course and to change its government.

Putin serves at the pleasure of a rich and cosseted Russian mafia oligarchy that has plundered Russia and stolen blood and treasure from the Russian people. By squeezing Russia economically, we will force that oligarchy to come to terms with the economic wreckage wrought by Putin’s misrule and his reckless invasion of Ukraine.

Costs. This economic war will not be cost-free for America and its NATO allies. We will suffer economic hardship and deprivation. In the short-term, certainly, the price of gas will rise dramatically. Disruptions to our electrical grid and Internet connectivity will occur.

But these will be temporary and transitory problems that I assure you we will overcome. America is rich in fossil fuels and energy abundance, and I will be unleashing the full power of our nation’s energy sector.

Our cyber capabilities, likewise, are second to none and not to be tampered with. Silicon Valley, after all, is an America creation and we will retain dominance in the cyber domain, while protecting our networks from attack.

Third, by means of economic warfare, we aim to force Putin from power, so that we can constructively engage a new Russian government that respects its neighbors and acts in accordance with international norms and international law.

We seek peaceful and constructive relations with Russia. And we are confident that, when Russia has a new government worthy of its history and its people, we again can have harmonious and mutually beneficial relations.

But this can only happen when Putin is removed from power and Russia has a new leader and not an international gangster at the helm who holds free and sovereign nations hostage.

Fourth, we demand the withdrawal of all Russian troops from Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia; the restoration there of freely elected democratic governments; and the end of Russian meddling in the internal affairs of these and other countries.

Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia were granted their freedom and independence in 1991 at the conclusion of the Cold War. However, all three countries have since seen their sovereignty undermined and taken by Russia at the behest of Putin.

This cannot stand. The nation-state, its territorial integrity, self-rule, and self-determination are pillars of the international order. Yesterday it was Georgia and Belarus; today it is Ukraine; and tomorrow it will be the Baltic states and Poland.

We must stop and reverse Russian military imperialism before it further unravels the world order and imperils America and the West.

Victory. Make no mistake: we will prevail. Because of Putin’s economic mismanagement and oligarchic plundering, Russia today is a poor country that has failed to realize its potential. Russia’s economy is smaller than the economy of South Korea and smaller than the economy of Italy.

And we are not acting alone, but instead in concert with allies who span the globe—from Europe to Asia, North and South America, Africa and the Middle East. Literally dozens of nations are joining us to reverse Putin’s dangerous assault on international norms and the international order.

Some Americans, I know, will say: why us? Why is Ukraine’s problem our problem? Why is Europe’s danger our danger?

Because, my fellow Americans, we live in a world in which America and Americans are deeply engaged, commercially and politically. Thus our well-being as a nation is inextricably and irreversibly linked to what happens far beyond our borders.

Our ability to travel and do business abroad, in all corners of the globe, will suffer mightily if Russian military imperialism is left unchecked.

And of course, as we’ve seen, Putin’s attacks have extended far beyond Ukraine. He has launched cyber attacks on America and Europe and waged a war of discord and disinformation on the West. He has undermined peace, stability, and freedom worldwide.

This will not stand. We are in an economic position to stop Putin and we will.

The path ahead will not be easy and it is not without risk. But previous generations of Americans have encountered far worse and triumphed over much greater odds. With your help and with God’s blessing, we will prevail. Freedom will be restored and justice will be done.

Thank you. God bless America and God bless the people of Ukraine.

Feature photo credit: President Biden (L) and Russian dictator Vladimir Putin (R), courtesy of Al Arabiya.

Biden Erred by Diplomatically Engaging Putin

Biden Erred by Diplomatically Engaging Putin

By John R Guardiano on January 27, 2022

U.S. diplomatic efforts have helped Putin while doing little to deter him.

Theodore Roosevelt famously said American foreign policy should “talk softly and carry a big stick.” Unfortunately, President Biden has turned Roosevelt’s maxim on its head. He has talked loudly and carried a twig.

Case in point: Ukraine. Biden and his foreign policy team have raised the alarm because Putin has amassed troops and equipment along the Russian-Ukraine border and Russia seems poised to invade Ukraine.

As a result, Team Biden has engaged in direct, one-on-one negotiations with Russia. They also have agreed to Russian demands that we respond in writing to Putin’s request for “security guarantees” vis-a-vis NATO and Ukraine.

Of course, Russia’s bellicose and threatening behavior toward its neighbors—including several NATO countries—is alarming and needs to be forcefully addressed and confronted.

But Biden’s rush toward diplomacy and engagement with Russia ignores how this actually strengthens Putin politically and elevates his standing, both domestically and abroad.

Putin, as Russia expert Leon Aron explains in a recent Remant podcast with Jonah Goldberg, craves international recognition and status. He craves being treated as an international leader whom other great powers—especially the United States—must contend with.

The Russian people, too, Aron says, wish to see their country and its leader placed on a par with the world’s dominant countries—especially the United States.

So what Biden has unwittingly done, argues Aron, is to elevate and strengthen Putin’s standing domestically, within Russia, as well as his standing vis-a-vis other countries.

How should the United States have responded to Putin’s menacing behavior? With far fewer words and certainly no high-profile meetings and summits. Or, as Roosevelt put it, “talk softly and carry a big stick.” As Aron explains:

It would have been enough to issue a statement at the Pentagon or State Department level: We are monitoring the situation, but the Kremlin has the right to conduct maneuvers on Russian territory.

That would have taken all of the wind out of Putin’s sails. But instead, Putin was given exactly what he wanted: calls from the White House, emergency meetings, a NATO-Russia Council meeting, and so on.

Every meeting with the American president— whether virtually, by phone, or even better, in person—is a colossal domestic gain for any Russian leader: it has been like this since Stalin. Only one country matters to Russia, and that’s the United States.

In his first year alone, Joe Biden has taken part in seven or eight rounds of talks with Putin. This is unprecedented in history. An absolute record and a big mistake. The United States should have reacted differently.

What Biden should have done is quietly provide Ukraine with advanced military equipment for both offensive and defensive purposes.

He should have strategically embedded U.S. military advisers into Ukraine for reconnaissance and intelligence, while redeploying our 34,000 U.S. troops from Germany into Poland and the Baltic States: Latvia, Lithuanian, and Estonia.

And Biden should have done this last spring, when Putin first began amassing troops and equipment along the Russian-Ukraine border.

That would have been a Roosevelian “big stick.” That would have sent a loud and clear message. That would have helped to deter Putin while protecting Ukraine and Eastern Europe.

Instead, Biden dithered and delayed because of a misplaced fear of provoking and antagonizing Putin.

Moreover, Aron says,

the U.S. also made a strategic mistake right from the start when it announced that it would neither exclude Russia from the SWIFT Agreement nor impose an import embargo on Russian oil and gas.

Those would have been the only two sanction options that would really hit the Kremlin hard. And they are the ones that were ruled out straight away.

Unfortunately, in international affairs, talk is anything but cheap. Talk can be costly and talk can have deleterious strategic consequences. For this reason, as we are painfully learning through Biden’s belated and voluble response to Putin, it is far better to “talk softly and carry a big stick.”

Feature photo credit: Presidents Joseph Biden and Theodore Roosevelt, courtesy of the Associated Press via SkyNews and Pach Bros via Wikpedia, respectively.

Why Is Russia Now Threatening Ukraine?

Why Is Russia Now Threatening Ukraine?

By John R Guardiano on January 14, 2022

Biden’s weakness gave license to Putin’s aggression.

When, last August, Joe Biden abjectly surrendered Afghanistan to the Taliban, he and his administration said this was necessary because the United States has no strategic interests there and must pivot, instead, to confront a rising China.

Never mind that, as William Lloyd Stearman points out, Bagram Air Base is strategically located “about 400 miles west of China and 500 miles east of Iran.” This, Stearman writes, is obviously “a good place to have American assets.”

U.S. Surrender in Afghanistan. Nonetheless, the President opted to withdraw all U.S. troops from Afghanistan and abandon Bagram to the Taliban. Mr. Biden pretended that his decision to surrender would not have deleterious and far-reaching strategic consequences.

Russia’s Vladimir Putin has proven Joe Biden wrong. The Russian dictator has amassed more than 100,000 troops and advanced military equipment along the Russian-Ukraine border, while demanding hegemonic control over Ukraine and other neighboring countries.

“We are concerned,” says White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, “that the Russian government is preparing for an invasion in Ukraine that may result in widespread human rights violations and war crimes should diplomacy fail to meet their objectives.”

Indeed, not since Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990 has the world seen such a brazen assault on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of an independent nation-state.

Why now? Because Putin has taken the measure of Joe Biden and realizes that our President is unwilling to protect the American national interest in Afghanistan or Europe.

In fact, Biden has pledged not to deploy U.S. ground troops or military advisers to Ukraine, and he has been reticent to arm the Ukrainian military for fear of provoking Putin.

As Bret Stephens observes, Putin and other anti-American dictators watched the American debacle in Afghanistan and concluded that “the United States is a feckless power.

“The current Ukraine crisis,” Stephens writes, “is as much the child of Biden’s Afghanistan debacle as the last Ukraine crisis [in 2014] was the child of Obama’s Syria debacle.”

In short, weakness is provocative. Weakness begets aggression. Weakness courts disaster. And weakness can have deleterious strategic consequences as we are now learning in Ukraine.

Featured photo credit: Joe Bidden and Vladimir Putin, courtesy of Fox News.