With Ukraine on its back foot, it's time to take the war to Putin
Macron may be a flawed messenger, but he's got the right message.
Note to Readers
The author has been suffering from COVID-19 for the last 10 days, which has affected the publication schedule. Normal publication of one to two columns per week will resume shortly.
***
It is time for the U.S. and NATO allies to pull out all the stops, and take the war to Putin.
Emmanuel Macron has usefully broken the taboo against considering sending troops to Ukraine from individual NATO countries. He may not be the right messenger1 but he’s got the right message.2 The vehemence of the reactions he has provoked demonstrates the deep divisions that exist among NATO leaders on how to proceed in Ukraine, and the depths of quasi-appeasement sentiment found in some NATO countries such as Germany.3
This is a qualified form of appeasement sentiment. It consists of endless debates on whether or not to supply Ukraine with specific weapons systems, delays in actually providing them, and refusal to provide game-changing weapons such as the longer-range Taurus cruise missiles, coupled with an absolute determination not to risk direct involvement in the war. But at the same time Germany has been Ukraine’s second-largest arms supplier. Paradoxical.
Highlighting the precarious nature of the situation in Ukraine, on March 6 Russia fired a missile that reportedly landed within 150 meters of President Volodymyr Zelenski and visiting Greek premier Kyriakos Mitsokakis who he was showing around in Odessa4
As Michel Tenzer argues in his impressive book, Notre Guerre (2024),5 the West faces a frontal challenge from Russia, which under Putin is relentlessly embarked on a mission to destroy international law, the U.N. Carter- based international legal order, and ultimately our civilization as it currently exists.
As a French intellectual, Macron may be safely assumed to have read the book. He has apparently taken its core message to heart. Macron is an outlier only in the sense that Winston Churchill was an outlier in May 1940. He is, to be sure, no Winston Churchill. Yet he is performing a vital role as a messenger, forcing other European leaders to look the terrible evil of Putin and Russia directly in the face.
Connecting many dots, Tenzer makes an overwhelming case that the war against Russian aggression in the Ukraine is “Our War”, not merely the war of Ukraine.
Pulling together the various threads in his argument, he persuasively concludes that Vladimir Putin and Russia today represent pure “Evil”, just as Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany did some 85 years ago when they launched World War II by invading Poland in 1939.
Tenzer is right. It is only because the psychological mechanism of “cognitive occlusion”6 has kept us from seeing a reality right in front of us, one that is so horrible we cannot even look at it, that Western leaders have failed to acknowledge that reality through deeds, not merely words. They mouth catastrophic warnings, and then go back to doing nothing to effectively meet the challenge.
It is time for NATO and the West to get serious about winning the war with Russia.
Before it may become necessary to send ground troops to Ukraine, there is much the West can do if it gets serious about winning “our war” against Russian aggression and its assault on our civilization.
What can be done?
First, the U.S. and NATO countries can lift all restrictions on the use by Ukraine of weapons it has supplied. These restrictions prohibit hitting targets in Russia and knocking out the Kerch Strait Bridge. The only limitations that should exist would be those imposed by the international law of self-defense including Article 51 of the U.N. Charter.
Second, the West can transfer to Ukraine large numbers if F-16 fighter aircraft, with numbers rising as quickly as pilots can be trained. These training programs should be expanded and accelerated to the maximum degree possible.
Third, the U.S. should flood Ukraine with long-range ATACMS artillery rockets and the unmodified HIMARS artillery units needed to launch them.
Fourth, NATO and other countries should send to Ukraine as many air defense systems and missiles as they can.
Fifth, Western countries should immediately send all the artillery shells they can to Ukraine. It is illusory to argue that they need to maintain stocks for their own self-defense in the event Russia invades them. The war is already underway. The best use for these weapons for these countries’ own self-defense is to deploy them in Ukraine.
Vladimir Putin will huff and puff, and threaten nuclear attacks against countries participating in such measures.
It is best to call his bluff at the beginning, rather than affording him multiple opportunities to threaten nuclear war.
Western governments should remind him that NATO countries have nuclear weapons, too. More importantly, they should remind the Russian population of the likely effects on their cities of a nuclear strike. If this information does not already exist in declassified form, it should be prepared as quickly as possible and presented to Russian populations.
Sooner or later, the U.S. and NATO will need to call Putin’s nuclear bluff, risking a confrontation. The sooner that happens, the better.
In the meantime Biden and other government leaders should ban references to “World War Three”, which has been Putin’s very effective psychological warfare tool. It has been particularly effective against Biden and Scholz. The slogan, or Pavlovian response, stops all thinking and analysis precisely where and when it should be accelerating.
If we’re talking about nuclear war, let’s say “nuclear war”, and think through the corresponding issues.
Rather than shutting down analysis, what we need is more open discussion of how to manage a nuclear confrontation with Russia. Now is a good time for that discussion. It won’t be any easier after Putin seizes the Suwalki corridor (connecting Russia to its exclave Kaliningrad, and the Baltics to Poland), or invades Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania.
It’s time to get serious about winning “Our War”.
James Rowles is a former Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School and professor of international law at other universities.
See Roger Cohen, “Opposition Blasts Macron for Risking Escalation in Ukraine; The French president attempted to forge a united front on a harder line against Russia. But few were persuaded,” New York Times, March 7, 2024 (updated 1:41 pm EST). Cohen provides the context which explains the resentment of many leaders toward Macron.
See Richard Kemp, “It’s hard to admit, but Macron is beating Britain on Ukraine; Will the other Nato leaders now keep clinging to the ‘spirit of defeat’ that Macron describes or will they realise they must get behind him?” The Telegraph, March 6, 2024 (10:33am).
See Sylvie Kauffmann, “Le débat sur l’envoi de soldats en Ukraine révèle les profondes différences de vision de la guerre parmi les alliés; L’enlisement du conflit ukrainien et l’appel du président Macron à un « sursaut stratégique » face à la Russie amène les Occidentaux, unis sur l’objectif de faire échouer Moscou, à affronter leurs divergences de culture sur le rôle que chacun doit jouer, analyse Sylvie Kauffmann, éditorialiste au « Monde’,” Le Monde, le 6 mars 2024;
Manuel Altozano (Mikolaiv), “A Russian projectile falls 150 meters from Zelenski and Mitsotakis during the Greek Prime Minister’s visit to Odessa; None of the leaders have been injured, but Moscow’s drone attack kills five people in the port city of southern Ukraine,” El País, March 6, 2024 (17:38 CET).
Nicolas Tenser, Notre Guerre: L crime et l’oubli—pour une pensée stratégique (Paris: Éditions de l’Observatoire/Humensis, 2024).
See also,
1)Laure Mandeville, “Weit über die Ukraine hinaus ist etwas sehr viel Tiefgreifenderes im Gange”: Der politische Philosoph Nicolas Tenzer erklärt den größten Fehler im strategischen Denken des Westens: die Annahme, dass Putin in der Ukraine einen klassischen territorialen Krieg führt. Und stellt klar, dass es eine Chance gegeben hätte, den russischen Machthaber von seinem Vorhaben abzuhalten,” Die Welt, den 11. Februar 2024 (14:50 Uhr (Interview mit Nicholas atenzer, Übersetzung von von Le Figaro);
2) Laure Mandeville, “”Far beyond Ukraine, something much more profound is going on”; The West must recognize the extent of the “total war” that Russia’s ruler Vladimir Putin is leading against Ukraine, demands the French author and political philosopher Nicolas Tenzer in his book “Notre guerre” (German: “Our War”). Die Welt, February 11, 2024 (2:50 p.m.). Interview with Nicolas Tenzer, translated from French article published in Le Figaro;
3) Laure Mandeville, “Nicolas Tenzer: ‘La question du mal est une porte d’entrée pour l’analyse stratégique’,” Le Figaro, le 1 février 2024 (18:57);
4) Laure Mandeville, “Nicolas Tenzer: ‘The question of evil is a gateway to strategic analysis’,” Le Figaro, (18:57).
See James Rowles, “Eight great illusions about the war in Ukraine; ‘Cognitive occlusion’,” Trenchant Observations, July 13, 2022.
***
Support the Author
Your author needs your support.
You may sign up for a free subscription. To receive all of the content as soon as it is published and to support the newsletter, please upgrade to a Paid or Founding Member subscription. To do so, click on the “Subscribe now” button below.
Alternatively, you may make a contribution to the author’s Go Fund Me appeal by clicking on the last button below. Go Fund Me does not take 10% as Substack does.