U.S. military, diplomats favoring providing lethal arms to Ukraine

With Russian-backed separatists intensifying their attacks in Ukraine, NATO Supreme Allied Commander Philip Breedlove now supports providing defensive weapons and equipment to Ukraine’s Armed Forces, the New York Times reported on Feb. 1. Moreover, numerous White House and military officials “appear to be edging toward that position,” the report said, citing anonymous American officials. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who will visit Kyiv on Feb. 5, is open to new discussions about providing lethal assistance, the report said, as is Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, who is leaving his post soon, supports sending defensive weapons to the Ukrainian forces.

In recent months, National Security Adviser Susan Rice has resisted proposals to provide lethal assistance, several officials said. But one official who is familiar with her views said Rice was now prepared to reconsider the issue, the New York Times report said. Fearing that providing defensive weapons might tempt Russian President Vladimir Putin to raise the stakes, the White House has limited American aid so far to “non-lethal” items, including body armor, night-vision goggles, first aid kits and engineering equipment, the report said.

U.S. President Barack Obama is considering providing Ukraine with “defensive weapons and other lethal aid,” the Associated Press reported on Feb. 1, citing an anonymous senior White House source. He described the measure as “a possible escalation that has had strong support from many in his national security team.” The president’s worries about sending higher-powered equipment are threefold, according to the official. He sees risk in starting a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia, he is worried that the Ukrainian military may not be well-trained enough to effectively use U.S. equipment and he believe no amount of arms would put Ukraine on par with the Russian military.

“Obama has weighed sending lethal aid to Ukraine before but has always decided against taking that step,” the AP report said. “But holding fast to that position has left him isolated within his administration, given the support for sending the Ukrainians defensive assistance from high-ranking officials, including Kerry and Breedlove.”

A report was released on Feb. 1 by eight former senior U.S. diplomatic and military officials that urged the U.S. and NATO to bolster Ukraine’s defense and deter further Russian aggression by providing military assistance to Ukraine, including lethal defensive assistance. Its main three recommendations involve calling upon the U.S. government to alter its policy and begin providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military, to approach other NATO countries about also providing military assistance to Ukraine and calling upon both the White House and Congress to provide USD 1 bln in military assistance this year, followed by an additional USD 1 bln each in the next two fiscal years.

Zenon Zawada: There’s no more difficult question in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict than whether additional arms in Ukraine will deter Putin’s military campaign. Our analysis shows that about half of experts arguing that a militarily enhanced Ukraine will stop Putin, while an equal number have the view that it will only encourage him towards escalation.

The difficulty in predicting the unfolding of events reveals just how dangerous the situation is, with the entire Russian decision-making process being concentrated in a single ruler, subject to his own lapses in judgment and emotions. The Financial Times released a report on Feb. 1 citing high-placed EU officials and diplomats who believe that Putin doesn’t know his own strategy and doesn’t have access to objective information, being surrounded by yes-men.

With the introduction of lethal weapons, there’s a real threat of the Ukrainian army becoming a proxy for American military interests. And we agree with the hesitations raised in the Feb. 1 AP report about giving Ukraine lethal armaments. The success of providing lethal arms and weapons largely depends on what exactly is offered. The Feb. 1 report by former senior military and diplomats makes specific suggestions on the defensive end, such as counter-battery radars and drones, as well as recommendations on “lethal defensive capabilities, especially light anti-armor missiles.” If the weapons are carefully selected in the manner outlined by the report, they can succeed in reducing the destructive effects of war on the Ukrainian economy and deterring Russian aggression.