The Forgotten War

There are two wars being waged on the world stage. One is an existential fight against a powerful invader. The other is an unexpected and unnecessary attack against a minor threat. One war has a clear strategic objective: to defeat and drive out the invader. The other has no discernable strategy and seems tactically focused on manipulating the daily financial markets and opinion polls. Which war dominates our headlines and consumes munitions badly needed to win the other?

The more important war, the one in Ukraine, is the one President Trump promised to end on Day One of his presidency. He couldn’t end that one and now he’s started another. The excuse most frequently offered is to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. But even U.S. intelligence doubts Iran was close to developing such a weapon and if they did, how would they use it? Dropping one on arch-rival Israel would produce radioactive fallout devastating Iran’s allies and proxies to the north, east and south. The mullahs may be mad, but even they must see the stupidity of using a first-strike nuclear weapon. Frankly, I’m becoming more concerned by Jerusalem’s unacknowledged possession of these weapons.

So, as the Israeli-American war on Iran dominates the public’s attention, Moscow’s aggression against Ukraine continues. While President Trump’s demands of Tehran shift almost daily, Premier Vladimir Putin’s goals are clearly stated. He demands Ukraine withdraw its forces from four regions that Russia has illegally annexed but never fully captured, renounce its bid to join NATO, sharply cut the strength of its army, and drop restrictions on use of the Russian language and against the Moscow-affiliated Orthodox Church. Putin frames his demands as if Ukraine were a renegade province. But let’s be clear. Though once a colony, Ukraine is no more Russian than is Alaska.

With the U.S. distracted by who controls the Strait of Hormuz today and trying to restrain its junior partner’s ongoing aggression, the Europeans are assuming greater responsibility for ending the Ukraine war. The recent defeat of former Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in Hungary has removed a major stumbling block to NATO’s support for Ukraine.

Still, that other war continues to endanger Ukrainian security. The Trump Administration has seized critical weapon systems and munitions the Europeans have bought and paid for to use in rearming Ukraine, for use in its own attacks against Iran. And restrictions on the flow of oil and Liquified Natural Gas through the Strait of Hormuz have spiked world energy prices, creating a windfall for Russian exports to fund its belligerence.

Ironically, the American president’s loss of interest in their war is now working to benefit Ukraine. Donald Trump’s dislike of a nation he could not bully made him a pliable tool for Vladimir Putin and an impediment to European support. Like Putin, Trump sees no role for Europe in peace talks and he consistently supported Moscow’s unjust demands over Ukraine’s inalienable rights. Now is the moment for Europe to stand up and demand Russia begin serious negotiations or suffer severe consequences.

These could begin with shutting down the oil and LNG exports that fund Russia’s war efforts. Unfortunately, this will not be easy. Disruption of hydrocarbon flows through the Strait of Hormuz has complicated European efforts to wean itself off Russian energy. Brussels must make a hard decision, because continued purchases from Russia make Europe complicit in the continuing devastation of Ukraine. But more expensive alternatives are available and should be used, even if this means sending tankers to the United States. This crisis may yield a beneficial result though, if it spurs Europe to accelerate its development of renewable energy sources.

Another move might involve seizure of Moscow’s so-called “shadow fleet.” Much of Russian oil exports are carried on several hundred ships sailing under false flags to evade international sanctions. Taking advantage of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), nations can regulate activities in their waters and can board vessels suspected of illegal activities. NATO members Denmark and Norway control access and exit from the Baltic Sea. They are within their legal rights to stop and search any suspect shipping and impound those found carrying sanctioned cargo or dodgy documents. It would be helpful if NATO member Turkey adopted a similar policy toward suspect shipping leaving the Black Sea.

A more aggressive move might be necessary if Moscow ignores these demands or intensifies its grey-zone warfare against Europe, such as sabotage of munitions plants and undersea infrastructure in the Baltic. One tactic could be logistic support for Ukrainian special forces to attach limpet mines to disable Russian merchant ships stopped at choke points in the Baltic and Black Seas. Another gambit might be to “loan” Ukraine the $300 Billion in Russian Central Bank assets frozen in Europe since the beginning of the invasion.

As a last resort, NATO should offer Ukraine full membership within the alliance. This confronts Putin with the choice between a ceasefire and facing the combined might of NATO’s European members. But this carries its own set of problems. First, such an offer must be unanimously ratified by the member nations. The Trump Administration would likely veto this unless the American president received something he values in return. Perhaps American ratification might provide the fig leaf of legitimacy for the Nobel Committee to award Donald Trump its Peace Prize. More likely, he will demand some painfully costly commercial concessions for his sons and their business partners. In the extreme case, NATO might have to overrule U.S. objections and offer Ukraine Article V protections, assuming that France, the UK, Germany, Poland and the Baltic States who would enforce it, agree to send their own forces against Moscow’s.

Though these recommendations seem realistic to me, I may well have overlooked some strong arguments against them. Regardless, NATO and the European Union must actively investigate how to end the war on their eastern flank now. As American international influence declines, her former allies must step in to fill the void, otherwise our common adversaries will.