Washington’s Carthaginian Peace Collides With Reality
The Biden administration refuses to tell the American
people the truth: Ukraine is not winning and will not win this war.
Nov 29, 2022
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/washingtons-carthaginian-peace-collides-with-reality/
The national political and military leaders who
committed America to wars of choice in Vietnam, the Balkans, Afghanistan, and
Iraq, did so as a rule because they were convinced the fighting would be short
and decisive. American presidents, presidential advisors, and senior military
leaders never stopped to consider that national strategy, if it exists at all,
consists of avoiding conflict unless the nation is attacked and compelled to
fight.
The latest victim of this mentality is Ukraine. In the
absence of a critical root-and-branch analysis of Russia’s national power and
strategic interests, American senior military leaders and their political
bosses viewed Russia through a narrowly focused lens that magnified U.S. and
Ukrainian strengths but ignored Russia’s strategic advantages—geographic depth,
almost limitless natural resources, high social cohesion, and the
military-industrial capacity to rapidly scale up its military power.
Ukraine is now
a war zone subject to the same treatment
the U.S. armed forces inflicted on Germany and Japan during the Second World
War, on Vietnam in the 1960s, and on Iraq over decades. Power grids,
transportation networks, communications infrastructure, fuel production, and
ammunition storage sites are being systematically destroyed. Millions of
Ukrainians continue to flee the war zone in pursuit of safety, with ominous
consequences for Europe’s societies and economies.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration repeatedly commits
the unpardonable sin in a democratic society of refusing to tell the American
people the truth: contrary to the Western media’s popular “Ukrainian victory”
narrative, which blocks any information that contradicts it, Ukraine is not
winning and will not win this war. Months of heavy Ukrainian casualties,
resulting from an endless series of pointless attacks against Russian defenses
in Southern Ukraine, have dangerously weakened Ukrainian forces.
Predictably, NATO’s European members, which bear the
brunt of the war’s impact on their societies and economies, are growing more
disenchanted with Washington’s Ukrainian proxy war. European populations
are openly
questioning the veracity of claims in the
press about the Russian state and American aims in Europe. The influx of
millions of refugees from Ukraine, along with a combination of trade
disputes, profiteering from U.S. arms sales,
and high energy prices risks turning
European public opinion against both
Washington’s war and NATO.
Russia has also undergone a transformation. In the
opening years of President Putin’s term of office, the Russian Armed Forces
were organized, trained, and equipped for exclusively national territorial
defense. But the conduct of the Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine has
demonstrated the inadequacy of this approach for Russia’s National Security in
the 21st century.
The opening phase of the SMO was a limited operation
with a narrow purpose and restricted goals. The critical point is that Moscow
never intended to do more than persuade Kiev and Washington that Moscow would
fight to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, as well as the further mistreatment
of Russians in Ukraine. The SMO was, however, based on invalid assumptions and
was terminated. As it turned out, the limited nature of the SMO achieved the
opposite of the outcome that Moscow desired, conveying the impression of
weakness, rather than strength.
After concluding that the underpinning assumptions
regarding Washington’s readiness to negotiate and compromise were invalid,
Putin directed the STAVKA to develop new operational plans with new goals:
first, to crush the Ukrainian enemy; second, to remove any doubt in Washington
and European capitals that Russia will establish victory on its own terms; and,
third, to create a new territorial status quo commensurate with Russia’s
national security needs.
Once the new plan was submitted and approved,
President Putin agreed to an economy of force operation to defend Russian
territorial gains with minimal forces until the required resources,
capabilities, and manpower was assembled for decisive operations. Putin also
appointed a new theater commander, General Sergei
Surovikin, a senior officer who understands the mission
and possesses the mindset to deliver success.
The coming offensive phase of the conflict will
provide a glimpse of the new Russian force that is emerging and its future
capabilities. At this
writing, 540,000 Russian combat forces are assembled in
Southern Ukraine, Western Russia, and Belarus. The numbers continue to grow,
but the numbers already include 1,000 rocket artillery systems, thousands of
tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones, plus 5,000 armored
fighting vehicles, including at least 1,500 tanks, hundreds of manned
fixed-wing attack aircraft, helicopters, and bombers. This new force has
little in common with the Russian army that intervened 9 months ago on February
24, 2022.
It is now possible to project that the new Russian
armed forces that will evolve from the crucible of war in Ukraine will be
designed to execute strategically decisive operations. The resulting Russian
force will likely take its inspiration from the force design and operational
framework recommended in Colonel General Makhmut Gareev’s work If War
Comes Tomorrow? The Contours of Future Armed Conflict.
The new military establishment will consist of much larger forces-in-being that
can conduct decisive operations on relatively short notice with minimal
reinforcement and preparation.
Put differently, by the time the conflict ends, it
appears Washington will have prompted the Russian State to build up its
military power, the very opposite of the fatal weakening that Washington
intended when it embarked on its course of military confrontation with
Moscow.
But none of these developments should surprise anyone
in Washington, D.C. Beginning with Biden’s speech in
Warsaw effectively demanding regime change in
Moscow, the Biden administration refused to see foreign policy in terms of
strategy. Like a stupid general who insists on defending every inch of ground
to the last man, President Biden confirmed the United States’s commitment to oppose Russia and,
potentially, any nation-state that fails to measure up to globalism’s
hypocritical democratic standards, regardless of the cost to the American
people, whether in terms of their security or prosperity.
Biden’s speech in Warsaw was hot with emotion and
mired in the ideology of moralizing globalism that is popular in Washington,
London, Paris, and Berlin. But for Moscow, the speech was tantamount to a
Carthaginian Peace plan. Biden’s “take no prisoners” conduct of U.S. foreign
policy means the outcome of the next phase of the Ukrainian War will not only
destroy the Ukrainian state. It will also demolish the last vestiges of the
postwar liberal order and produce a dramatic shift in power and influence
across Europe, especially in Berlin, away from Washington to Moscow and, to a
limited extent, to Beijing.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Douglas Macgregor
Douglas Macgregor, Col. (ret.) is a senior fellow with The
American Conservative, the former advisor to the Secretary of Defense in
the Trump administration, a decorated combat veteran, and the author of five
books.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario