Ukraine: Does Obama Really Want War?

“We continue to encourage a diplomatic resolution to this issue. And as diplomatic efforts continue this week, we are in absolute agreement that the 21st century cannot stand idle — have us stand idle and simply allow the borders of Europe to be redrawn at the barrel of a gun.” U.S. President Barack Obama uttered these words during the press conference after a bilateral meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. They met on Monday at the White House, just before the Minsk summit between Putin, Hollande, Poroshenko and Merkel herself to tentatively resolve the Ukraine crisis through an immediate ceasefire and to lay the foundations for a lasting agreement. So, does it mean that Obama wants war to resolve the diplomatic and political impasse with Russia? If we listen to the “Russian campaign,” this is the case, but is it the reality?

The U.S. sticks to its positions: “It’s clear that they’ve violated just about every commitment they made in the Minsk agreement,” said Obama. “Instead of withdrawing from Eastern Ukraine, Russian forces continue to operate there, training separatists and helping to coordinate attacks. With Russian support, the separatists have seized more territory and shelled civilian areas, destroyed villages, and driven more Ukrainians from their homes.” Washington is putting its foot down. On the opposite side, Europe continues to search for a diplomatic approach through mediation, maybe giving the impression of extreme weakness and division on the other side of the Atlantic. But instead, both could be actually playing a role: the good cop (Europe) and the bad cop (the U.S.), following the same goal. And I agree with their respective roles. Before the upcoming Minsk summit, Europe announced that they will delay a new round of sanctions. In the meantime, the U.S. is pondering the possibility of sending arms to Kiev, among which are anti-tank missiles. Last September in Minsk, a nine-point agreement was signed which includes a ceasefire and a demilitarized zone. But the pact was violated over the next weeks: Pro-Russians blamed Kiev and the Ukrainian government accused the rebels of having attacked their own troops again.

“On providing lethal weapons to Ukraine, it's important to point out that we have been providing assistance to the Ukrainian military generally,” Obama said clearly. “So there’s not going to be any specific point at which I say, ah, clearly lethal defensive weapons would be appropriate here.” It is for now only an option. Chancellor Merkel stressed how important it is “to make one further attempt to make progress through diplomatic means” to reach an agreement between Kiev and Moscow. But she reiterated that, “There is anything but an assured success in all of this.” A risk of escalation could happen at any moment.

Obama made it abundantly clear that the U. S. state of mind “has not been for Ukraine to be equipped to carry out offensive operations, but to simply defend itself.” And he further added “Unfortunately, Russia has made a decision that I think is bad for them strategically, bad for Europe, bad for the world. And in the face of this aggression and these bad decisions, we can’t simply try to talk them out of it. We have to show them that the world is unified in imposing a cost for this aggression.” Regarding the divisions in Europe, Obama tried to defuse tensions by saying: “But you may rest assured, the alliance between the United States and Europe will continue to stand, will continue to be solid, even though on certain issues we may not always agree.”

If you want peace, prepare for war. The Latin adage* is known to everyone: to the U.S., to Russia and to Europe. But it doesn’t mean that “the real war” will be fought with arms. If the diplomatic path to resolving the conflict with Moscow fails, Obama said, “We agreed that sanctions on Russia need to remain fully in force until Russia complies fully with its obligations.” So far, he added, “It has created a measurable negative impact on the Russian economy and that will continue. My hope is that through these diplomatic efforts, those costs have become high enough that Mr. Putin’s preferred option is for a diplomatic resolution.”

In order to win, it is necessary to flex one’s muscles and to be ready to use them without hesitation. Every single vacillation is a huge advantage for the other part. If Obama wants to impose himself in this very delicate game, he will need to take inspiration from Reagan, the real winner of the Cold War. Will he want (be able) to do it?

*Editor's note: Si vis pacem, para bellum.