Despite Ukraine, the U.S. should let allies do more to balance Russia

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
March 1, 2022
Contact: press@defensepriorities.org

WASHINGTON, DC—Today, President Biden will deliver the State of the Union address. Defense Priorities Policy Director Benjamin H. Friedman issued the following statement in response:

“President Biden’s State of the Union Address will sensibly be concerned with the war in Ukraine. The president deserves mixed marks on the matter. On the plus side, he has shown admirable restraint in avoiding steps that might escalate the conflict to wider war, even as he condemns and sanctions Russia’s actions. A NATO-Russia conflict would be a disaster that risks nuclear catastrophe and should be avoided at all costs. Thankfully, the president declined to put the U.S. nuclear force on a higher alert, a useful symbol of this restraint. But the administration’s anemic diplomatic efforts to avoid invasion may have missed a chance to keep the peace—we’ll probably never know.

“The president should take advantage of the European moves to increase defense spending in the wake of the invasion. This increased effort, plus the poor Russian showing so far in this war, underlines the point that Europeans are more than capable of balancing Russia’s threat with less U.S. help. European powers, especially Germany, can and should do more to shore up NATO’s front and deter Russian aggression.

“The president should not dwell entirely on Ukraine. Americans are not combatants, however much we wish to see Ukraine unmolested. U.S. foreign policy cannot ignore other matters, like finding a modus vivendi with China as it rises. Additionally, exiting the wars in Iraq and Syria and reducing the U.S. military presence in the Middle East is of paramount importance—here the president should follow the logic he articulated in his laudable exit from Afghanistan: Permanent ground forces are not necessary or even useful for counterterrorism.”

DEFP analysis: Putting the Ukraine-Russia crisis into perspective

DEFP explainer: The folly of a democracy-based grand strategy