Tag: counteroffensive

  • Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive

    Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive

    [ad_1]

    One side will say that Ukraine’s advances would’ve worked had the administration given Kyiv everything it asked for, namely longer-range missiles, fighter jets and more air defenses. The other side, administration officials worry, will claim Ukraine’s shortcoming proves it can’t force Russia out of its territory completely.

    That doesn’t even account for the reaction of America’s allies, mainly in Europe, who may see a peace negotiation between Ukraine and Russia as a more attractive option if Kyiv can’t prove victory is around the corner.

    Inside the administration, officials stress they’re doing everything possible to make the spring offensive succeed.

    “We’ve nearly completed the requests of what [Ukraine] said they needed for the counteroffensive as we have surged weapons and equipment to Ukraine over the past few months,” said one administration official who, like others, was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive internal considerations.

    But belief in the strategic cause is one thing. Belief in the tactics is another — and behind closed doors the administration is worried about what Ukraine can accomplish.

    Those concerns recently spilled out into the open during a leak of classified information onto social media. A top secret assessment from early February stated that Ukraine would fall “well short” of its counteroffensive goals. More current American assessments are that Ukraine may make some progress in the south and east, but won’t be able to repeat last year’s success.

    Ukraine has hoped to sever Russia’s land bridge to Crimea and U.S. officials are now skeptical that will happen, according to two administration officials familiar with the assessment. But there are still hopes in the Pentagon that Ukraine will hamper Russia’s supply lines there, even if a total victory over Russia’s newly fortified troops ends up too difficult to achieve.

    Moreover, U.S. intelligence indicates that Ukraine simply does not have the ability to push Russian troops from where they were deeply entrenched — and a similar feeling has taken hold about the battlefield elsewhere in Ukraine, according to officials. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says the U.S. hasn’t adequately armed his forces properly and so, until then, the counteroffensive can’t begin.

    There is belief that Kyiv is willing to consider adjusting its goals, according to American officials, and a more modest aim might be easier to be sold as a win.

    There has been discussion, per aides, of framing it to the Ukrainians as a “ceasefire” and not as permanent peace talks, leaving the door open for Ukraine to regain more of its territory at a future date. Incentives would have to be given to Kyiv: perhaps NATO-like security guarantees, economic help from the European Union, more military aid to replenish and bolster Ukraine’s forces, and the like. And aides have expressed hope of re-engaging China to push Putin to the negotiating table as well.

    But that would still lead to the dilemma of what happens next, and how harshly domestic critics respond.

    “If the counteroffensive does not go well, the administration has only itself to blame for withholding certain types of arms and aid at the time when it was most needed,” said Kurt Volker, the special envoy for Ukraine during the Trump administration.

    A counteroffensive that doesn’t meet expectations will also cause allies in foreign capitals to question how much more they can spare if Kyiv’s victory looks farther and farther away.

    “European public support may wane over time as European energy and economic costs stay high,” said Clementine Starling, a director and fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington, D.C. “A fracturing of transatlantic support will likely hurt U.S. domestic support and Congress and the Biden administration may struggle to sustain it.”

    Many European nations could also push Kyiv to bring the fighting to an end. “A poor counteroffensive will spark further questions about what an outcome to the war will look like, and the extent to which a solution can really be achieved by continuing to send military arms and aid alone,” Starling said.

    Biden and his top aides have publicly stressed that Zelenskyy should only begin peace talks when he is ready. But Washington has also communicated to Kyiv some political realities: at some point, especially with Republicans in control of the House of Representatives, the pace of U.S. aid will likely slow. Officials in Washington, though not pressing Kyiv, have begun preparing for what those conversations could look like and understand it may be a tough political sell at home for Zelenskyy.

    “If Ukraine can’t gain dramatically on the battlefield, the question inevitably arises as to whether it is time for a negotiated stop to the fighting,” said Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations. “It’s expensive, we’re running low on munitions, we’ve got other contingencies around the world to prepare for.”

    “It’s legitimate to ask all these questions without compromising Ukraine’s goals. It’s simply a question of means,” Haass said.

    Earlier this month, Andriy Sybiha, a deputy head in Zelenskyy’s office, told the Financial Times that Ukraine would be willing to talk if its forces reach Crimea’s doorstep. “If we will succeed in achieving our strategic goals on the battlefield and when we will be on the administrative border with Crimea, we are ready to open [a] diplomatic page to discuss this issue,” he said.

    That comment was quickly rebuffed by Tamila Tasheva, Zelenskyy’s Crimea envoy: “If Russia won’t voluntarily leave the peninsula, Ukraine will continue to liberate its land by military means,” she told POLITICO earlier this month.

    It doesn’t help America’s confidence that the war has slowed to a brutal slog.

    Both sides have traded punishing blows, focused on small cities like Bakhmut, with neither force able to fully dislodge the other. The Russian surge ordered up earlier this year, meant to revitalize Moscow’s struggling war effort, seized little territory at the cost of significant casualties and did not do much to change the overall trajectory of the conflict.

    The fighting has taken a toll on the Ukrainians as well. Fourteen months into the conflict, the Ukrainians have suffered staggering losses — around 100,000 dead — with many of their top soldiers either sidelined or exhausted. The troops have also gone through historic amounts of ammunition and weaponry, with even the West’s prodigious output unable to match Zelenskyy’s urgent requests.

    U.S. officials have also briefed Ukraine on the dangers of overextending its ambitions and spreading its troops too thin — the same warning Biden gave then-Afghan President Ashraf Ghani as the Taliban moved to sweep across the country during the U.S. military withdrawal in 2021.

    But the chances of Ukraine backing down from its highest aspirations is, to say the least, unlikely. “It’s as if this is the only and last opportunity for Ukraine to show that it can win, which of course isn’t true,” said Alina Polyakova, president and CEO of the Center for European Policy Analysis in Washington, D.C.

    [ad_2]
    #Bidens #team #fears #aftermath #failed #Ukrainian #counteroffensive
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • ‘We’ve proved everybody wrong’: Ukraine claps back after counteroffensive intel leak

    ‘We’ve proved everybody wrong’: Ukraine claps back after counteroffensive intel leak

    [ad_1]

    “The same people who said Kyiv would fall in three days are now leaking harmful and equally ridiculous information ahead of an offensive critically important for the entire free world,” said a person in regular contact with senior officials in Kyiv.

    “There are some people who continue to be hesitant” about Ukraine’s military chances in the counteroffensive, a Ukrainian defense official said, “but we’ve proved everybody wrong.” The projections of Ukraine’s chances are “not the truth,” this official continued. “It gives us grounds for suspicion” of just how seriously the U.S. backs Ukraine’s objectives of fully pushing Russia out of the country.

    That sentiment is widespread within the Ukrainian government, per another person with similar high-level contacts in Kyiv. All three people were granted anonymity to detail sensitive internal deliberations in Ukraine.

    The comments make clear that the United States and Ukraine aren’t as in sync as both countries claim 14 months into the war. It could also portend less trust between Washington and Kyiv ahead of a crucial few months of fighting that could dictate the course of the war with Russia. With Russia in control of 20 percent of Ukrainian territory, the hope is that the counteroffensive, even with dwindling supplies, will force Moscow’s troops and mercenaries out of the country they invaded.

    The U.S. efforts at damage control do appear to be getting some traction.

    Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba tweeted that Secretary of State Antony Blinken called him Tuesday to affirm America’s “ironclad U.S. support and vehemently rejected any attempts to cast doubt on Ukraine’s capacity to win on the battlefield.” And Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin also spoke to his counterpart, Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov, on Tuesday to convey Ukraine “will fight the enemy and not be driven by a specific plan.”

    The coordination continued on Wednesday when Austin met Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal.

    The Ukrainian defense official also asserted that Kyiv has received assurances of America’s continued commitment from Austin and other top Biden administration figures. “You can be forgiven for having doubts,” the official said about the Americans. “We understand it.”

    The National Security Council didn’t respond to requests for comment.

    The intelligence provides a disheartening evaluation of Ukraine’s anticipated spring counteroffensive, and it isn’t the first such indication of the Biden administration’s lack of confidence in Ukraine’s military chances this year.

    Ukraine’s counteroffensive, per the intelligence, will target eastern and southern Ukraine, with an ultimate goal of cutting off Russia’s land access to Crimea, the peninsula Moscow illegally annexed in 2014. Few in the administration, though, believe Kyiv can recapture much of the territory Russia took since its invasion last year, citing manpower, resupply and logistics concerns.

    Gen. Mark Milley, the Joint Chiefs chair, has repeatedly questioned Ukraine’s ability to win the war militarily in the near term. “The probability of a Ukrainian military victory, defined as kicking the Russians out of all of Ukraine, to include what they define or what the claim is Crimea, the probability of that happening anytime soon is not high,” he told reporters last November. Milley’s assessment hasn’t changed: he told Defense One last month that Ukraine couldn’t expel Russians “in the near term for this year.”

    Ukrainian officials are also increasingly angry at continued leaks about their operations. Reports on sensitive intelligence connecting Ukraine to the assassination of a prominent Russian nationalist’s daughter and a pro-Kyiv group to the bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines frustrated Ukraine.

    More cracks in the U.S.-Ukraine relationship have emerged in recent months. For example, Kyiv has poured troops and resources into holding Bakhmut, a city in the east of the country. But officials in the White House and Pentagon, among others, don’t see Bakhmut as strategically important. They’ve recommended that Ukraine focus its attention elsewhere.

    U.S. officials are particularly concerned about Ukraine using up critical supplies of ammunition in the fight for Bakhmut, as the West races to prepare Kyiv for what’s expected to be brutal fighting this spring.

    There are also disagreements about whether it’s worth it for Ukraine to recapture Crimea from Russia. The Biden administration fears Ukraine doesn’t have all it needs to take and hold the peninsula that Moscow has controlled for nearly a decade. Zelenskyy doesn’t agree: “Respect and order will only return to international relations when the Ukrainian flag returns to Crimea — when there is freedom there,” he said in a video message this week.

    Pentagon officials are also alarmed by Ukraine’s dwindling supply of medium-range air defense missiles, according to a U.S. official and the leaked documents. Based on current consumption rates of these missiles, Kyiv’s ability to provide air defense to protect the front lines will be “completely reduced” by May 23, according to one slide produced by the Joint Staff, a deadline the U.S. official said is driving the timing of the counteroffensive.

    The concern is that once Ukraine is out of medium-range air defense missiles, Russian fighter and bomber aircraft will be free to attack Ukrainian troop and artillery positions from the skies. Until now, neither side has been able to fly combat aircraft freely in the conflict. The West has sent short-range air defense missiles, such as Stingers, but these weapons have limited impact against aircraft, according to the leaked documents.

    The U.S. and European countries are sending two Patriot missile defense systems, but a group of Ukrainian air defenders is still wrapping up the final stage of training to operate the equipment in Europe before they head to the battlefield.

    Ukraine’s air force is also depleted, and Western countries have declined to send modern fighter aircraft such as F-16s, which could also intercept incoming missiles.

    Lara Seligman contributed to this report.



    [ad_2]
    #Weve #proved #wrong #Ukraine #claps #counteroffensive #intel #leak
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • U.S. diplomatic counter-offensive targets China’s ‘false information’

    U.S. diplomatic counter-offensive targets China’s ‘false information’

    [ad_1]

    china russia explainer 74942

    The new details about Washington’s messaging strategy, including the extent to which the administration is pushing back on Beijing behind the scenes through diplomatic outreach to allies and partners, illuminates the lengths to which Washington feels it needs to go to counter China.

    Those efforts also underscore the Biden administration’s resolve to hold Beijing accountable for the incident and to use it as an exemplar of the long international reach of China’s malign activities, even as China tries to woo Europe and other regional blocs.

    The Biden administration has reacted strongly “because it’s so clearly a case where the Chinese should just have admitted that they took an action that they should not have taken,” said Zack Cooper, former assistant to the deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism at the National Security Council.

    “And rather than just owning up to what was pretty obvious for all to see, [Beijing] launched into a whole propaganda campaign that was pretty frustrating for the administration, especially given that they were heading into what would have been [Secretary of State Antony] Blinken’s first trip to Beijing.”

    The National Security Council declined to comment on the record for this story.

    China has continued to push back against the U.S. allegations, deflecting questions about its surveillance activities and the extent to which it is planning on supporting Russia in Ukraine. Now, the two countries are engaged in an intense public standoff, and neither side is indicating that it’s ready to back down anytime soon.

    It started with the spy balloon. On Feb. 5 — the day after the U.S. shot down the Chinese surveillance balloon off the coast of South Carolina — the Biden administration sent out an “action request” to U.S. diplomatic posts across the globe telling them to push the message that China “is attempting to change the narrative by providing false information.”

    The cable included 28 concise talking points for U.S. representatives from Brussels to Grenada and Frankfurt to Busan to share with foreign government officials “in private diplomatic engagements.” The U.S. had several key demands for Beijing, according to the cable, including that the airship “cease operations” and “immediately” leave U.S. airspace.

    The State Department pushed its diplomats to move fast. Beijing was mobilizing state media to accuse the U.S. of overreacting in its decision to destroy the balloon in a bid to paint the Chinese government as “the responsible actor in the dispute.” Diplomats were directed to emphasize that the U.S. “is not looking to escalate the situation.”

    “We thought it was the responsible thing to do on our part to share as much as we could. Our presentations have been fact-based. This is not an effort to engage in a messaging exercise or to put spin on the ball,” said a State Department official who was granted anonymity because the individual was not authorized to speak on the record.

    The U.S. was just as persistent with China. Officials from the top tiers of the Biden administration down to the embassy level of the State Department have engaged with their counterparts in China in more than a dozen meetings since the balloon was first detected in late January, according to two of the U.S. officials. The officials, and others, were granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic discussions.

    There’s been little to show for that outreach, however. Beijing rejected an offer to get on the phone with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on Feb. 4, the day the balloon was shot down. It wasn’t until several days later that the Chinese embassy called to lay out the country’s official response, one it had already given publicly: The balloon had merely been dispatched to monitor the weather, one of the U.S. officials said.

    Then, when Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Beijing’s top diplomat Wang Yi on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference this weekend, both had sharp words for their counterparts. And Blinken didn’t limit himself to the balloon. He also directly warned the Chinese about taking the step to send weapons to Russia to aid its Ukraine war effort — a prospect the U.S. is increasingly worried about.

    “I was able to share with [Wang], as President Biden had shared with President Xi, the serious consequences that would have for our relationship,” Blinken said in an interview with CBS’s Face the Nation.

    Beijing has responded with provocations of its own.

    “It’s the U.S. side, not the Chinese side, that’s providing an endless flow of weapons,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin told reporters Monday. The U.S. side isn’t qualified to point fingers at China or order China around.”

    U.S. officials say they’re trying to force Beijing to back down, in part, by detailing the intelligence they have against them.

    Over the last several weeks, administration officials have downgraded the classification level on certain intelligence regarding the balloon and China’s plans regarding support for Russia in order to share that information with their Chinese counterparts, two of the officials said.

    The officials said that though the U.S. has long been concerned about China and Russia’s alliance, new details about their economic and military partnership have emerged in recent days, putting the administration on edge.

    The U.S. has also briefed allies about that intelligence and is requesting diplomats across the world push back against both Beijing’s false narrative about the balloon and its consideration of sending lethal weapons to Russia, two of the officials said.

    If messages coming from Europe this week are any indication, the outreach to allies, at least, is creating a united front.

    On Monday, the EU’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, said it would be a “red line” for the European Union if China sends arms to Russia. Top diplomats from Sweden and Lithuania voiced similar sentiments. And NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg followed suit on Tuesday.

    China’s Wang Yi, meanwhile, arrived in Russia Wednesday where he met with President Vladimir Putin and the head of Russia’s National Security Council. Putin declared that Russia-China ties had reached “new frontiers” and announced that Chinese paramount leader Xi Jinping is expected to visit Russia later this year.

    [ad_2]
    #U.S #diplomatic #counteroffensive #targets #Chinas #false #information
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )