On March 11 Anthony Constantini, a Fellow at Defense Priorities published an article arguing first that because the Russo-Ukrainian war has become a war of attrition Russia will inevitably prevail due to its manpower advantages over Ukraine. Second, he contends that “America has absolutely no national interest in providing security guarantees” to Ukraine. Instead, our “overriding interest” lies in avoiding war with Russia
These points are hallmarks of the MAGA movement and have also been made by Vice-President Vance. Unfortunately, despite the loudness and supposed authority with which they are proclaimed, these arguments are not supported by the facts or by history which is a better guide here than superficial political arguments. First, the war has descended into a war of attrition for now in large measure because of the inconstancy of U.S. support for Ukraine under both the Biden and Trump administrations. If Ukraine had received the military assistance it needs on a constant basis, that assistance coupled with the innovative work of Ukraine, e.g. its manufacture of drones that can even hit Moscow, may well have turned this into a war of movement. We should remember that Ukrainian forces have successfully invaded Russian territory in Kursk Oblast, forced the Black Sea into what amounts to hiding in its home port of Novorossiysk, and made Crimea untenable as a military base for Russia. Those are not signs of a permanent war of attrition, quite the opposite.
Neither is Russia foreordained to be victorious due to its alleged manpower advantage. Russia, like Ukraine, cannot recruit sufficient manpower and its outmoded command and control and tactics are directly responsible for the 900,000 killed, wounded, or MIA that it has suffered. This is why it must use North Korean and foreign troops. Its defense industrial sector is also unable to keep up with the demand for weapons.
The Russian economy is likewise on the verge of a runaway inflation and suffers from an acute labor shortage. Moreover, as a study of Russian history demonstrates, every long war in Russian history has placed the state under extreme stress and this war is no exception. If President Trump were to follow through on his threat of genuinely enforced sanctions upon Russia or if the Biden administration and Europe had done so we would have already seen much worse economic conditions throughout all of Russia as a result of this rigorous enforcement of sanctions combined with military defeat that would create a truly dangerous domestic situation in Russia.
Constantini further argues that we have no interest in granting Ukraine a security guarantee. Here too his argument is wrong. If Russia had observed the eight treaties it signed guaranteeing Ukraine’s security and integrity, then Ukrainian neutrality would not be under threat. But Putin’s obsession with restoring the Russian empire and unfounded claim that Ukraine is a “stolen” part of Russia leaves Kyiv with no choice but to fight. Furthermore, if Russia were to prevail as will happen if we surrender Ukraine to it then the costs of defending Europe multiply by large figures of magnitude.
Neither can we sway that we have no interest in securing Ukraine for every American statesman since FDR and even some before him recognized that Europe, dominated by a hostile anti-democratic power like Russia threatens vital American interests and values. Perhaps Constantini should ask European defense planners how a revived Russian empire affects not only European but also American security before dismissing the fact that we fought two world wars and the Cold War precisely to prevent German and Soviet domination over Europe.
Finally, he also gets American interests wrong. Yes, we have an overriding interest in avoiding war with Russia but that does not translate into supine acquiescence to Russian threats. Instead, given our superiority over Russia it means enhancing deterrence, both conventional and nuclear, along with our allies. Had we stood by our signature on the treaties with Ukraine and deterred
Russian military forces through conventional means in 2021-22 this war would never have started, nor would Putin’s nuclear threats have had any meaning. As it is, Ukraine and the West have walked right through these threats even to the point of attacking Moscow and Russian us territory without any sign of war with Russia. Indeed, it is Russia which, as any European leader can tell you, that has attacked the West, albeit unconventionally but which, if it is allowed to win in Ukraine will be ready for another round in 2030. Thus, avoiding a war with Russia does not entail our own self-deterrence when Russia wantonly attacks another country in defiance of major international treaties. Rather it means deterring them at the conventional and if necessary, the nuclear level to prevent such a war. No amount of MAGA stridency can overcome this truth unless the prospect of an Orwellian perpetual war among Oceania, Eurasia and East Asia is your desired outcome. Then self-deterrence regarding Europe makes rhetorical sense but then we will be the next target.
Dr. Stephen J. Blank is a Senior Fellow at Foreign Policy Research Institute. He is an internationally renowned expert on Russian and Chinese defense policy. He is the author of “Light from the East: Russia’s Quest for Great Power Status in Asia” (Taylor & Francis, 2023). He was a Professor of National Security Studies at the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College.