US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin conjured up a hazard from Russia in Pitching , Congress, with his request for more assistance for Ukraine.
Austin stated that it is “very good” that US troops stationed in Europe does engage Russia in combat if Congress does not correct$ 61 billion in support for Ukraine.
After only 20 minutes, Republican senators left the presentation for a variety of reasons, most notably an argument over whether to link the assistance to US border security.
Austin envisioned a danger in which Russia, after finishing with Ukraine, may start attacks in Europe. However, realistically, there is no proof that Russia poses a threat to anyone in Europe.
That’s not to suggest that many Russians believe their generals may be posing a threat to Europe. After all, Europe is training Russian troops and assisting Ukraine in developing its battle plans in addition to providing Ukraine with significant army, cleverness, and technical support in the conflict with Russia. Western weapons stocks intended for NATO security have been delivered to Kiev.  , Most of them wo n’t be replaced for, if ever, decades.
NATO is the actual property magnet in Russia’s eyes.  , After all, NATO grew in the Balkans and Eastern Europe despite the flagrantly broken promises and cautions Russia made to Russia. ( The Russians were frequently assured that NATO would not grow, beginning with a promise from former President Bill Clinton. )
Expansion has entails providing the new NATO members with high-quality American weapons, establishing NATO bases there, and immediately posing a threat to Russia.
At the end of World War II, Russia conquered the majority of Eastern Europe in order to establish a security cushion. Of course, that was not the only cause; the Russians were also eager to obtain tools in these nations.  , One remembers that the Nazis and their friends caused great destruction and emigration in Russia.
None of this implies that Russia would not want to regain the benefits of NATO’s growth following the fall of the Soviet Union. And, yes, it is quite true that Russia’s” Special Defense Operation” may be regarded as a land grab in Ukraine.
But there is little indication that Russia intends any growth in Eastern Europe or the Baltic States and practically no knowledge of any kind supporting the Austin war essay.  , If there were any material knowledge you can safely bet the Biden administration did permit Congress know (especially when it has its hands out for more money for the war ).
There are three causes for crediting the same assumption, especially that Russia has no purpose of expanding outside of the Ukraine conflict place.
The second reason is behavioral.  , With NATO’s battle shares at an all time lower, Russia could have taken advantage of this risk and moved its troops against NATO target – for instance NATO operations in Poland or in the Balkans – but have not done so.
The Russians have exercised extraordinary restraint and yet tolerated hostile intelligence flights and NATO marine exercises in the Black Sea, an incredibly sensitive Russian security worry.  , The Black Sea is not only the rear doorway to Ukraine, it is also a path to issue Russia itself.
Russia also exercised caution when Ukraine used robots to strike an airport inside Russia where , nuclear planes are based.  , Two of these aircraft were neither damaged or destroyed.  , For an assault needed intelligence assistance from NATO, mainly the US, and the Russians no uncertainty understood that quite well.  , Yet the Russians tolerated the harm to a level and took no actions to broaden the conflict.
There is some information that the assault on the Soltsy- 2 airport was launched by the Ukrainians from Estonia, as Ukrainian drones did not have the selection to approach the airbase.
Other examples of Russian caution include the , sinking of Russia’s premier Moskva , with US support, many attempts to destroy the , Kerch Strait bridge , connecting Russia to Crimea and several assaults on Moscow, including an attempt to hit Putin’s Kremlin business in what Russia says was  , an attempt to assassinate Putin.
The second reason to see Russia as hesitant to increase the discord is that doing so would be exceedingly costly.  , Russia has already learned just how cheap the Ukraine battle is, even though it is , eventually winning the war , after nearly two years of fighting. A RAND study found that even though NATO ground troops would face significant challenges, a war in Europe would only make Russia’s pain worse.
The cost of labor and combat deaths for Russia is the greatest.  , It is challenging to determine actual casualties because both Ukrainians and Russians either do n’t tell the truth or remain silent.
However, the fact that Russia needs to increase its military recruitment and has even filled prisoner deficiencies indicates that the war has claimed a lot of life. It also implies that if the number of dead and injured rises to large, the war’s reputation in Russia may be in jeopardy.
Given the impact on labor, it is difficult to imagine that Russia may start a larger battle. Andnbsp, The Soviet individuals, who know how to resist a issue when it starts to lick them at home, would not continue to support the war. Russia was coerced into leaving Afghanistan by  , That’s What, starting the drawback in May 1988 and finishing it in February 1989. Andnbsp, ( That was n’t enough to stop a coup attempt or save Gorbachev, and it caused the USSR to fall apart.
The expected wild cards of American sanctions on Russia is the second argument against Russia escalating the conflict.
In essence, NATO and numerous other nations allied with the United States or the European Union imposed severe sanctions on Russia in response to Putin’s” Unique Military Procedure” in Ukraine.  , This forced Russia to reevaluate its potential and drove it into the hands of China. Above all, it meant that Russia’s tools, industry, and economic system would be moved away from Europe and the west.
This is a significant new development that alters Russia’s corporate course. Additionally, it blatantly refutes the claim that Russia stands to gain from any harm on Europe. The Russians are actually becoming less and less engaged in either Europe or the United States.  , It is safe to say that NATO, its allies, and the EU all suffered significant proper losses as a result of the extra-legal Western sanctions.  ,
It is likely to late to repair the harm done to any potential relations, even if a peace agreement is reached with Ukraine and Europe and the US lifts sanctions against Russia. Russia wo n’t reject trade with the West, but it’s likely to only enter into agreements for business on its terms.  : It is unlikely that Russia will once more permit northern businesses to conduct business there, and the nation will work more closely with China to develop systems and weapons. In other words, the Russians accepted the last order after the western filed for divorce.
For the aforementioned reasons, the Austin explanation is untrue and deceptive.  ,
Some claimed that the Biden administration’s arguments were sour and unrealistic when the Republicans left the key lecture held for the Senate to try and buy them on supporting more funds for Ukraine. The Biden attempt to intimidate the Senate was a complete failure. In addition,  ,
What will the Trump group think of future?
The Near East Subcommittee of the United States ‘ team chairman was Stephen Bryen.
As a assistant secretary of security, the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and nbsp
is now a mature fellow at Yorktown Institute and the , Center for Security Policy.
This article was previously published on his Weapons and Security Substackby . It is republished with your type consent.