The second Minsk agreement, which was supposed to establish a ceasefire in Ukraine and was announced last week, was met with a mixture of cautious hope and healthy skepticism. After all, the belligerents – Ukrainian security forces and pro-Russian separatists – had demonstrated a proclivity for breaking previous ceasefire agreements, leaving little reason to believe that the current iteration would hold. As German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated, the latest agreement offered “a glimmer of hope, no more no less.”
With that glimmer of hope now all but extinguished due to the inability of either side to withdraw heavy weapons from the highly contested city of Debaltseve, the question those anxious of Moscow’s ambitions now find themselves asking is, “Now what?”
As we wrote last week, the United States should be prepared to send defensive weapons as part of a larger strategy that would include lifting restrictions on U.S. energy exports to Europe, withdrawing from the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, and strengthening the North Atlantic Treaty Organization alliance.
With reports of at least 129 violations of the current ceasefire occurring and Ukrainian security forces being killed in separatist assaults on Debaltseve, it is safe to conclude that the ceasefire has failed. The U.S., therefore, should be prepared to provide Ukraine with defensive weapons.
Beyond the recommended course of action, U.S. leadership and the international community must form a realistic determination of what Vladimir Putin’s strategic objectives are for Ukraine, which principally seem to be keeping Ukraine, a former Soviet satellite, from shifting westward.
It was a foregone conclusion that Russian-backed forces would take Debaltseve (again), as separatists control all of the surrounding territory, and had effectively engulfed Ukrainian security forces. Taking the city consolidates gains made by pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine and should signal Moscow’s lack of real interest in consenting to future ceasefire agreements.
It is time for the west to get serious about Russian infringement of Ukrainian sovereignty. By providing Kyiv with defensive weapons, the west would force Putin to change his calculus. A failure to do so would only would only prolong the status quo, which at this point is decidedly in Moscow’s favor.
Further indecision will only encourage Putin to continue his aggressive behavior and allow him to maintain a preponderance of Russia’s regional influence. It would therefore be prudent to act now before allowing the Russians to seize the initiative, split Ukraine and meet their strategic objectives. If the west fails to make Putin pay a price for his transgressions in Ukraine, the west will ultimately pay a far higher price later.
