From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By MORGAN MURPHY

The foreign policy blob in Washington, D.C., would have us believe that Vladimir Putin is Adolf Hitler 2.0 and must be stopped before he rolls over the rest of Europe. It is an intellectually lazy argument.

In the first place, Russia has struggled in its fight with Ukraine—a small nation with one-fourth Russia’s population and far fewer resources. How would Mother Russia fare against the combined firepower of NATO? Likely not so hot: Europe’s economy is six times larger than Russia’s. Likewise, the population advantage of Europe stands three-to-one over Russia.

Aside from Russia’s vast nuclear weapons stockpiles, it is no match for Europe.

Putin knows he would be crushed in a head-to-head with NATO and has repeatedly made clear that he has no interest in going to war with any NATO country, including Poland.

Secondly, if Europe was seriously under threat from the Russian bear, you might think that Europeans themselves would be more alarmed. They don’t seem to be. In fact, across nearly every threat measured by the Munich Security Council, trends show a downward ebb among Europeans. To most, Russia ranks as a threat below radical Islamic terrorism and mass migration. The Germans are more worried about cyber attacks than Putin; to the French, racism is more worrisome.

Aren’t these the very people America is spending $185 billion in Ukraine to protect from Russian expansionism?

Across the European continent, the United States maintains 100,000 troops on 185 major military bases and 78 minor sites (minor being defined as less than 10 acres or $10 million). Taken altogether, American forward operating bases in Europe sprawl over 265,000 acres with an estimated value of $95.5 billion. When one examines the Department of Defense’s annual budget, protecting Europe is America’s largest yearly expenditure—and that’s before Ukraine supplemental funding is added to the tally.

Yet the average resident of Berlin is likely more worried about his email getting hacked than he frets about the Kremlin rolling tanks through Deutschland.

Europe was the world’s center for combat power from roughly 1400 until 1945. No more. Even the larger armies of NATO are struggling to maintain effective combat power. The British Army cannot sustain a complete expeditionary armored brigade. At 23 years old, the Charles de Gaulle, France’s flagship and sole aircraft carrier, is reaching the end of its effective lifespan but sea trials are not expected to begin for its replacement until 2036.

The French have less than 90 heavy artillery pieces—Russia is losing more each month fighting Ukraine. Reporting in October 2022 found that Germany only had enough ammunition for two days of war, far below the NATO 30-day minimum. In 2022 NATO exercises, none of the Bundeswehr’s 18 new Puma infantry fighting vehicles were able to complete the drill.

Ukraine has revealed many of NATO’s weakness. These led a professor of war studies at the University of Warwick, Anthony King, to remark that Europe has “systematically demilitarized itself because it didn’t need to spend the money. They have basically gone to sleep.”

That ambivalence toward defense comes across in another recent survey of Europeans. Sixty percent of Italians, 47% of Germans and 40% of the French are in favor of cutting off arms shipments to Ukraine. Across Europe, 60% think that Ukraine will be an economic burden. Among the French, Spanish and Italians, more than 40% either don’t know or don’t care who wins the war in Ukraine.

Perhaps America’s security blanket for Europe has been too heavy and we have indeed lulled the continent into a stupor. Or maybe Europeans are correct in their assessment of Putin—that his invasion of Ukraine is not a precursor to the reassembly of the U.S.S.R.

In either case, more American taxpayers are questioning the D.C. logic that demands ever-increasing blank checks for a war with no end in sight.

Morgan Murphy is a former DoD press secretary, national security adviser in the U.S. Senate, a veteran of Afghanistan.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Featured image credit: (Screen Capture/CSPAN)

From LifeSiteNews

This is a major escalation of NATO engagement, likely intended to provoke Russia to strike alternate targets.

According to Politico and the New York Times the Biden administration has given Ukraine approval to launch U.S.-provided missiles into Russia. This is a major escalation of NATO engagement, likely intended to provoke Russia to strike alternate targets. The people inside Ukraine responsible for using these U.S. provided weapons are likely not Ukrainian.

CTH is in an unusually serendipitous position to analyze how Russia is responding to this shift in U.S. position. The morale inside Russia is very high amid the military-age population. The recruitment efforts of the Russian government appear to be numerous and very effective.

There are thousands of newly enlisted military personnel very visible in/around training facilities. There is no apparent tension discernable. Overall Russia appears to take great pride in their military, and it is considered a matter of honor and pride to support them.

From Politico:

The Biden administration has quietly given Ukraine permission to strike inside Russia – solely near the area of Kharkiv – using U.S.-provided weapons, two U.S. officials and two other people familiar with the move said Thursday, a major reversal that will help Ukraine to better defend its second-largest city.

‘The president recently directed his team to ensure that Ukraine is able to use U.S. weapons for counter-fire purposes in Kharkiv so Ukraine can hit back at Russian forces hitting them or preparing to hit them,’ a U.S. official said, adding that the policy of not allowing long-range strikes inside Russia ‘has not changed.’

… In effect, Ukraine can now use American-provided weapons, such as rockets and rocket launchers, to shoot down launched Russian missiles heading toward Kharkiv, at troops massing just over the Russian border near the city, or Russian bombers launching bombs toward Ukrainian territory. But the official said Ukraine cannot use those weapons to hit civilian infrastructure or launch long-range missiles, such as the Army Tactical Missile System, to hit military targets deep inside Russia.

It’s a stunning shift the administration initially said would escalate the war by more directly involving the U.S. in the fight. But worsening conditions for Ukraine on the battlefield – namely Russia’s advances and improved position in Kharkiv – led the president to change his mind.

You can tell from the general vibe amid the officials of government, Russia is not playing around with their military approach toward previous NATO encroachment or the provocations by the U.S. The sense is that Russia is in this for the long haul and their structural changes in the aftermath of the sanction regime are not temporary. Russians overall are hard and resilient to the reality of things as they are, not as they would wish them to be.

Russia appears to be entirely prepared financially, sociologically, and economically to remain disconnected from the “West.” Asia and India are filling the economic void created by Western sanctions. Amid ordinary life, the general Russian sentiment seems to be one of acceptance to the geopolitical isolation.

In recent weeks, the push toward further conflict with Russia seemed to be diminishing; however, this direct action by Biden and the State Dept. puts the U.S. (NATO) in a more aggressive posture.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán opposes the escalation by NATO:

During a Friday interview on state radio, Orbán said that French President Emmanuel Macron’s stance that he wouldn’t rule out sending troops to Ukraine, as well as a NATO proposal that would allow Kyiv to strike military bases inside Russia with sophisticated long-range weapons provided by Western partners, risked escalating the war in Ukraine into a global conflict.

‘War is a monster that is constantly hungry, it must be fed, and it must be fed with money. And I see that the Americans and the Democratic government of the United States, and the leaders of the European Union, are ready to feed it,’ he said.

Reprinted with permission from the Conservative Treehouse.