Bandaids for Bullet Holes: Biden’s Incompetence Risks a Russian Incursion of Ukraine

Russian tanks drive on a Crimean highway. (Source: AP News)

Bloodshed threatens to repeat itself in Ukraine. In 2014, Putin annexed the Crimean peninsula after its citizens chose to join Russia in a disputed referendum, killing over 13,000 in the invasion and subsequent rebellions. Russia’s annexation not only challenged Ukrainian sovereignty but weakened the post-1945 world order. Yet, the United States regarded the issue as a mere inconvenience and failed to provide a prolonged counter-response. The lack of concrete response taught Putin that American threats are hollow when commitment is weak. Since 2014, Putin has heralded this lesson, continuing to bedevil Ukraine by hacking power grids, interfering in elections, and increasing troop numbers on the border. But now, tensions threaten to blow. Reminiscent of the expansionist dreams of the Soviet Union, Russia appears to be on the verge of invading Ukraine once again.

Since last October, Russian troop numbers near the Russo-Ukrainian border grew to over  100,000. The sheer number of troops seeks to deter Ukrainian integration into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). NATO, a collective security partnership among western democracies, was established during the Cold War to counter Soviet influence. Putin views Ukraine, a former Soviet republic, as an extension of Russia; thus, a possible Ukrainian accession into NATO or even indirect collaboration through military exercises would threaten Russia’s sphere of influence. Biden, in response, adamantly refused to cave, believing that the Ukraine is not only a bulwark against Russian interests but a beacon of western integration for former Soviet states. The clashing of demands pushes both countries towards an ever-possible culling: military conflict. Russia denies wanting to invade Ukraine, but NATO analysts believe that Putin may attack as early as next month. Such analysts even compared the current tensions to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, when the world was on the brink of nuclear war. Biden must evaluate his decisions and avoid past mistakes to de-escalate the growing conflict. 

Past administrations knew that Russia was capable of major disruptions, but overwhelmingly viewed Putin's antics as a secondary task when faced with more pressing threats. The Trump administration initially sparked hope in healing the Russo-American relationship after the former President boasted that he and Putin were “best friends.” Their so-called BFF status quickly disintegrated. Yet unlike middle school drama, friendship fall-outs on the international stage have tangible consequences. Trump refused to negotiate with Russia over arms control agreements and failed to renew the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Force Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty. The expiration of these pacts brings the two countries into a territory eerily reminiscent of the Cold War: each state has limited information, creating a possibility that one may miscalculate the intentions of the other. Additionally, Trump pledged on multiple occasions to leave NATO, although the United States functions as its de-facto leader. His reckless comments were mere bluffs; nevertheless, his threats cracked the foundation of NATO – a foundation that Russia desperately seeks to break. 

Given the fraught history between the two states, Biden’s options remain bleak. Yet, he risks making the relationship even bleaker through sanctions. The President plans to implement personal sanctions against Putin if Russian aggression continues. Personal sanctions individually target Putin by freezing his overseas assets, imposing international banking penalties, and banning the Russian leader from traveling to certain countries. This policy inevitably marches towards failure since Putin’s wealth is largely hidden by third-party proxies. In addition, the sanctions may even amplify his popularity. Foreign leaders can easily use sanctions to create a rally-around-the-flag effect among their constituents. Other international despots, ranging from the former Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe to the current Ayatollah Khamenei of Iran, utilized this tactic to rouse nationalism when faced with international isolation. Furthermore, sanctions may even prevent Putin from entering other countries for diplomatic negotiations; similarly, Moscow may implement counter-sanctions that bar American foreign officers from entering Moscow.

As both nations march toward war, Biden must re-evaluate his options. Sanctions are merely band-aids for bullet holes that fail to address underlying issues. The Russian troop buildup threatens to transform Ukraine into not only a war zone but a bellwether for blood. With the threat of a Russian incursion almost imminent, Biden cannot rely on the most overused tool in the foreign policy arsenal. The stakes are too high to bear, the chances too high to hazard, the risks too high to endanger.