What Does the Recent Leak Tell Us About the U.S. Proxy War in Ukraine? - Mackubin Owens

What Does the Recent Leak Tell Us About the U.S. Proxy War in Ukraine? - Mackubin Owens

The Biden administration has generally been optimistic—at least in terms of its public rhetoric—about the war in Ukraine. On 20 February, President Joe Biden, speaking in Kyiv, told Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenksy, “This is the largest land war in Europe in three-quarters of a century, and you’re succeeding against all and every expectation, except your own. We have every confidence that you’re going to continue to prevail.”

 

U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken recently seconded the president: US “security assistance will allow Ukraine to continue to bravely defend itself against Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified war… Russia alone could end its war today. Until Russia does, the United States and our allies and partners will stand united with Ukraine for as long as it takes."

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

 

And the administration has backed up its rhetoric with action, recently announcing a massive new military aid package for Ukraine valued at $2.6 billion, including $500 million worth of ammunition for U.S.-provided High Mobility Rocket Artillery Systems (HIMARS), air defense interceptors, including the Patriot system, artillery rounds, anti-armor systems, small arms, main battle tanks, heavy equipment transport vehicles, and maintenance support, all taken from U.S. stockpiles. There are also serious discussions about providing F-16 aircraft.

 

This is only the latest installment. Since the Russian invasion a year ago, the United States has provided Ukraine with over $32 billion in security assistance (equipment, training, maintenance, and sustainment), to which must be added the costs for U.S. operations and maintenance required over 20,000 additional US troops in Europe to support the war effort and deter Russian attacks on NATO territory.

 

But the administration’s narrative has taken a hit in recent days. The US national security establishment has been rocked by a leak that many are calling potentially the most damaging U.S. national security disclosure since Edward Snowden passed along highly classified documents revealing National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programs nearly a decade ago.

 

The leaked documents bear on many topics, including the work of Russian operatives, Israel’s Mossad, and the plans of allies, including South Korea and Egypt. But by far, the most explosive element of the documents is the Pentagon’s pessimistic assessment of Ukrainian prospects in the war with Russia, radically opposed to the administration’s public pronouncements.

 

If these documents are legitimate, which they appear to be, they suggest that the members of the national security community are increasingly concerned that the situation in Ukraine is degrading rapidly, that the Ukrainian military is burning through artillery and air defense munitions far faster than they can be replaced, and that there is little or no likelihood that the Ukrainians can launch any sort of a counteroffensive later this year.

 

According to the leaked documents, Ukraine faces, among other challenges, critical shortages of Soviet-era and Russian-made artillery and air defense ammunition. In addition, Ukrainian units have been degraded after months of warfare around Bakhmut, in eastern Ukraine. As a result, Ukraine faces difficulties in generating forces—massing troops, ammunition and equipment—for its anticipated counteroffensive aimed at retaking Russian-occupied areas this spring. In addition, dwindling U.S. stockpiles mean that much of the military aid that the United States announced for Ukraine last week in a $2.6 billion package, including more ammunition for the Patriot and HIMARS systems, still must be built by U.S. defense contractors before it can be sent overseas. 

 

The strategic logic of US/NATO support for Ukraine is predicated on the idea of a proxy war: rather than confronting Russia directly, war by proxy enables us to weaken Russia indirectly, thereby reducing both the cost and risk to ourselves. But the leaked report suggests that in the case of Ukraine, the strategic logic of proxy war has been reversed: rather than a cheap way for us to bleed the Russians white, Ukraine has become a black hole draining our own stocks. As one commentator has written, “the proxy has become a parasite. "

 

The United States has chosen to pursue a proxy war with Russia, which is supposed to reduce the risks that a direct war would entail. But even proxy wars require strategic guidance, including an assessment of risk, which in this case are substantial: a possible direct confrontation between Russia and the United States and NATO; the creation of a dangerous anti-US alignment that not only forges deeper ties between Russia and China but also includes a number of other states including India, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran; and financial problems associated with increased inflationary pressures. 

 

Unfortunately, US policymakers have repeatedly failed to articulate our strategic objectives in Ukraine. As our strategy for proxy war in Ukraine unravels, we need to remember the old saying that “hope is not a strategy.”