OPINION:
Russia fired an intercontinental ballistic missile at Ukraine on Thursday. The deadly rocket carried only a conventional warhead, but the message it delivered was unmistakable. ICBMs are implements of nuclear devastation.
This missile didn’t carry a nuclear weapon; the next one might.
Russian leader Vladimir Putin is responding in kind to the provocation of President Biden and his foreign policy staff. The team led by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and national security adviser Jake Sullivan gave Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy the green light to launch U.S.-made supersonic missiles known as ATACMS deep into Russian territory.
On Tuesday, the Russian Defense Ministry confirmed that six of these missiles had been launched toward Bryansk, about 230 miles southwest of Moscow. First used in the 1990s during Operation Desert Storm, ATACMS can target strategic assets with a precision that requires intelligence capabilities that Ukraine does not possess on its own.
An objective observer might see Western involvement in an attack on Russian soil as an act of war. It’s worth asking why an administration with under 60 days left in office would escalate hostilities in such a way after being defeated at the polls.
The administration’s intent can be inferred from its actions. Right now, crates are being crammed with as many American munitions as can be flown to Kyiv before Jan. 20, regardless of the impact on U.S. readiness.
“As our shelves continue to get stocked with equipment and capabilities that are needed, we draw down from those and send those to Ukraine. The president has committed to ensuring that every dollar that Congress is allocated will be spent,” Pentagon spokesman Sabrina Singh said on Tuesday.
Ms. Singh insisted Mr. Putin’s threats of nuclear retaliation are a bluff: “It’s the same irresponsible rhetoric that we’ve seen before and that we’ve seen frankly for the past two years. So it’s something that we’re going to continue to monitor.”
It may very well be a bluff, but is it really worth poking the Russian bear until we find out it wasn’t? Either Mr. Putin is a madman intent on recreating the Soviet Union who will stop at nothing — as we have been told — or he is someone who will restrain himself from using his most potent weapons no matter what the United States does. Both statements can’t be true.
The current U.S. policy appears to be designed to take away the incoming president’s options, sabotaging his foreign policy agenda. Mr. Biden’s foreign affairs are handled by professional saboteurs.
When Mr. Sullivan worked on Hillary Clinton’s campaign, he was a principal driver of the Russia hoax narrative that derailed President-elect Donald Trump’s first term. Likewise, while working on Mr. Biden’s 2020 campaign, Mr. Blinken organized the deceitful letter signed by 51 former intelligence officials falsely claiming Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation.
It would be more sensible to respect the will of the voters and give the next president a chance to fulfill his campaign promise of finding a negotiated solution that ends the bloodshed. Instead, Mr. Biden, Mr. Blinken and Mr. Sullivan are willing to drag the world to the brink of nuclear conflagration to block any possibility of a peaceful settlement.
Mr. Biden’s supporters gleefully cheered that “the adults are back in charge” when he won the 2020 election. In reality, our foreign policy has been run by children who just overturned the game board because they lost.
Let’s hope Mr. Trump is able to put the pieces back together before it’s too late.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.