The best peace plan for Ukraine is sending military support

The best peace plan for Ukraine is sending military support

David Ignatius — Read time: 4 minutes

Yesterday at 7:01 p.m. EDT

A crate filled with mortars is pictured in footage said to show combat with Russian troops near the Kyiv region in Moshchun, Ukraine. (Ukrainian Military TV, handout via Reuters)

With the war for Ukraine in its third bloody week, the world faces two urgent questions: How do we help the brave Ukrainian people continue their fight for freedom? And how do we bring this war to an end before Ukraine is destroyed?

The two questions may seem sharply at odds, but the Biden administration rightly believes they are related. By stepping up military assistance to Ukraine — and making President Vladimir Putin pay an ever-steeper price for his invasion — the United States and its allies will boost the chances of a peace agreement that is not a capitulation to Russia’s flagrant aggression.

Military support for Ukraine is the best peace plan, in other words. Already, Ukraine’s valiant defense has led Putin to soften his initial war demands. A “peace process” is underway, involving would-be mediators from Israel, Germany, France and other nations. Let’s hope this can produce a cease-fire before too long. But any real settlement will require Putin to change course — not just to save Ukraine, but to save Russia.

Diplomats have been working overtime this past week to craft a formula for a neutral Ukraine on the model of Austria, whose security would be guaranteed by Germany, France, Russia, the United States and perhaps other nations. This formula would reflect a major concession by Putin, but it could also diminish the heroic status of President Volodymyr Zelensky. Many Ukrainians would argue that their people didn’t fight and die to achieve neutrality.

The decision about war and peace should belong to Zelensky and his nation. But as diplomacy moves forward, several things seem certain. First, there’s sure to be more fighting on the way to a truce. Second, the Ukrainians (and their NATO partners, too) will need top-flight diplomats to negotiate with cunning Russian negotiators in a process that could resemble the 1995 Dayton Accords that ended the Balkan war.

Putin needs peace more than anyone because he has failed to achieve his war aims: Ukraine did not crumble; it proved to be the real, unified nation that Putin claimed didn’t exist. Europe has not retreated before Russian demands; instead, it’s more united than at any time since 1945. The United States is not leaderless and dysfunctional; Biden has mumbled his way to bipartisan support.

Putin’s reckless gamble has failed, and the longer he continues the war — and razes the cities of Ukraine — the deeper and longer-lasting this failure will become.

Biden’s visit to Europe next week should be a platform for the dual campaign ahead: He should reaffirm U.S. and NATO commitments to provide Ukraine with the weapons to resist Russia’s unlawful, unprovoked attack. And he should support the peace efforts that have accelerated over the past week.

Putin’s war should end in utter defeat. But in the nuclear age, such decisive outcomes may not be possible. President Franklin D. Roosevelt decided in January 1943 to demand “unconditional surrender” by Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. It was perhaps the most consequential decision of the war — and one that shaped the rest of the 20th century. The destruction of the German and Japanese war machines enabled the miraculous reconstruction of those nations as prosperous democracies.

The West yearns for a similar democratic reconstruction of Russia. But it’s unobtainable through force of arms, for a simple reason: Putin has signaled his willingness to use nuclear weapons if attacked by the United States and its NATO partners. Biden has said (and perhaps over-said) from the beginning that he will avoid direct military conflict with Russia. That’s why no-fly zones and MiG transfers are unwise.

But the United States doesn’t need to fight World War III to destroy Russian power. Putin is destroying himself. The longer the war goes on, the less will remain of Russia’s military and economic might. Putin’s regime is self-liquidating, if the United States and its allies can help Ukraine stay in the fight. Ukraine doesn’t need to win; like Gen. George Washington in the Revolutionary War, it just needs to survive.

The Biden administration shouldn’t take extreme risks in the weeks ahead — simply do more of what’s working: Transfer more antitank and antiaircraft missiles through the four NATO countries that border Ukraine. Provide bigger, more advanced antiaircraft missiles, not just shoulder-fired Stingers. Send more of the Turkish-made drones that have been so deadly. Deliver anti-ship missiles to blunt Russian dominance of the Black Sea coast. Send more fuel and ammunition. As long as Russia chooses to keep fighting, make the war as painful as possible.

This war has been horrific for Ukraine, but it’s been very costly for Russia, too. One U.S. estimate is that in the first three weeks, Russia may have suffered 5,000 dead. That would be more than the U.S. military lost in all the years of fighting in Iraq, and more than double the U.S. death toll in 20 years of combat in Afghanistan. And Russia’s losses are just beginning.

We’re at a potential tipping point now, where each side sees some advantage in a negotiated peace. Paradoxically, that’s the time when the United States should redouble its support for Ukraine, until the last guns of the Russian invaders go silent.