1) Russia has amassed over 100,000 troops on Ukraine's borders and is poised to attack, but the US and Russia are engaged in political posturing rather than decisive action. 2) Putin seeks to reassert Russian power and regain territory lost after the fall of the Soviet Union. An invasion of Ukraine could weaken NATO in the long run if it bogs Russia down in a costly war. 3) The US response has been threats of sanctions rather than military deterrence, which may actually provoke Russia to invade rather than deescalate tensions. It remains to be seen whether Russia's aggression or the US gamble on sanctions will prove the more effective strategy.

1. THE BLOGS
Andy Blumenthal
Goading The Bull In
Ukraine
(Source Photo: https://pixabay.com/photos/trimmers-torero-bullfighters-sales-2314770/)
ADVERTISEMENT

2. A few years ago, Israel’s former Foreign Minister, Avigdor Liberman (Soviet-
born) cautioned about Israel’s indecision on handling the existential Iranian
nuclear threat:
These days, there is a similar situation with Russia and the U.S.’s threats over
Ukraine: too much senseless political bantering and ultimatums that is only
ratcheting up tension in the world. The result is that Russia’s ominous military
machine including 100,000 troops have surrounded Ukraine (the 2nd largest
country in Europe) on three sides and are poised to attack, yet there is a
ridiculous song and dance being played out on the world stage that looks
something like this:
Russia beefs up their military on the borders with Ukraine. The U.S. seemingly
gets all anxious claiming that Russia is getting ready and/or going to attack. In
order to deescalate, Russia demands guarantees from the U.S. that they will not
admit Ukraine into NATO in the future. The U.S. dismisses it and instead offers
negotiations over military exercises and missile placement in Eastern Europe as
well as arms control agreements, and threatens “severe consequences”
(primarily economic sanctions) and claims unity with Europe, while the EU
waffles. Russia ups the ante and the cycle repeats for weeks now.
This is not the way the superpowers typically engage in Russia’s back yard.
For example, when Russia wanted to take Crimea in 2014, there wasn’t all this
saber-rattling, instead they just did it flash bang. With little to no warning,
Russia and their mercenaries were in taking and annexing Crimea and
fomenting separatists in the Donbas region of Eastern Ukraine before the West
even knew what hit them. A similar story played out when Russia invaded
We need decisiveness, determination, not whining…no agreement will stop
them. If you want to shoot, shoot, don’t talk.”
“

3. Georgia in 2008 taking and still occupying territories of South Ossetia and
Abkhazia (about 1/5 of Georgia) and it was over in matter of days.
What’s Putin After?
On one hand, Russia and China are coming together (and not just in increased
trade and military exercises) to confront the United States, and make the U.S.
look impotent even as it continues to be “war-weary” after the long and in many
ways unsuccessful wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In doing so, Russia seeks to
reassert their powerful stature and regain strategic lands from the days of the
old Soviet Union, the loss of which Putin sees as the “greatest geopolitical
catastrophe” of the 20th century. While at the same time, China adamantly
wants to reabsorb Taiwan even by force as well as to dominate the South China
Sea where a third of the world shipping occurs. While the U.S. had sought to
pivot to East Asia to confront the increasingly powerful China, Russia’s
dangerous antics in Europe have divided the U.S.’s attention and capabilities.
Together, Russia and China strategize that they may be able to both get what
they want and avoid a serious military confrontation with the West.
The U.S. Fallback to Economic Warfare
Amidst Russia’s continued military buildup, the U.S. has said openly and
repeatedly that they are not going to commit troops to defending Ukraine and
have instead simply put a token 8,500 on “heightened alert” to deploy to
eastern Europe in the case of hostilities. Rather than any serious military
maneuvers or threats of it to ward off Russia, the U.S. talks of economic
consequences and sanctions, which didn’t work eight years ago when Russia
took Crimea and there is no reason to think it will work now. Further, sanctions
haven’t crippled North Korea or Iran, so it is doubtful that it will thwart the
bigger and badder Russia. At the very least, if the U.S. wanted to keep Russia
off-balance and to think twice what the U.S. will do, it could simply use
ambiguity to keep Russia guessing and unsure of themselves. Moreover, instead

4. of ratcheting up the consequences for Russia, the U.S. seems to be watering
them down from initially threatening the heavy-hitting disconnect of Russia
from the SWIFT international banking system to now just imposing export
sanctions on some key technologies and potentially halting the Nord Steam 2
gas pipeline to Germany. Thus, the perceived toothless threats of more
sanctions seem to be having the opposite effect of de-escalation and is instead
goading Russia to increase their military preparedness for a full-scale invasion
of Ukraine.
What Does the U.S. Hope to Achieve?
The disproportionate and likely ineffectual soft reaction by the U.S. to Russia’s
hard military threat to Ukraine is escalating tensions rather than ratcheting
them down. In effect, the U.S. is saying to Russia: “Go ahead, we dare you!” This
makes sense, if the U.S. sees Ukraine as a strategic blunder for Putin that will
cause Russia to lose far more than they think they have to gain. The gambit is
that if Russia invades, a number of things will happen that will actually weaken
Russia in the long-term. While initially Russia’s superior military forces will
overwhelm Kyiv, the belief is that in the longer-term, Russia will get bogged
down in a costly war of attrition with the Ukrainians on top of the subsequent
economic sanctions both of which Russia can ill afford. Moreover, Russia will be
seen to be on the “wrong side of history” having invaded a sovereign country
and either annexed or occupied it along with much ensuing death and
devastation being inflicted. Therefore, instead of weakening NATO as Russia
would like to see happen, this in effect will strengthen NATO convincing its
members that the Russian threat is still very much persistent and will result in
it making an even greater investment in their armed forces to counter Russia in
the future.
In the end, the question is whose strategy will prove to be the winning one:
Russia’s daunting finger on the trigger or even an actual devastating invasion of
resource-rich Ukraine to try and safeguard their flank on Eastern Europe or the

5. ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Andy Blumenthal is a business and technology leader who writes frequently about Jewish life,
culture, and security. All opinions are his own.
U.S. gambling that Russia will get mired in a no-win Afghan-like military foray
that will bankrupt them financially and morally. As we await the answer to this,
the world is learning to disregard and disrespect those that talk bull and goad
the bull rather than decisively confronting the threat. We can’t afford the
consequences to world peace and stability.