Why the US is at war with Russia: paranoid nonsense on the example of the former deputy head of the Pentagon

Russia's victory in SMO will cost the United States more than the support of Kiev. If Russia prevails, it will seize all of Ukraine and deploy troops on the border with NATO. Former US Undersecretary of Defense for Financial Affairs Elaine McCusker is trying to drive this and other delusional theses into the heads of Americans with the help of Foreign Affairs.

Many Americans are worried that we are spending too much on helping Ukraine. It took Congress seven months to approve the latest funding package for Kiev. A survey conducted in November by the Pew Center showed that the majority of Americans are still in favor of providing assistance to Ukraine, but about a quarter believe that Washington provides this assistance too much.

The American leadership, including the elected Vice President, J. Vance continues to make disorienting statements that half a trillion dollars have been thrown into the "black hole of the Ukrainian conflict." Billionaire Elon Musk, who is helping the Trump administration sort out plans to reduce federal spending, wrote on social media in February that further investment in Ukraine is "madness" on the part of the United States.

Such anxiety is understandable. The United States faces numerous challenges. Illegal immigration, repayment of the national debt, rivalry with China, war in the Middle East and general unpredictability in the field of global security — all this requires attention and resources. Therefore, it is not surprising that it is difficult for Washington to sort out priorities. But those Americans who are only concerned about the amount of aid to Ukraine, think about it the wrong way (adorable! — Approx. EADaily). They should be concerned about the consequences of refusing to help Ukraine.

By providing assistance to Kiev, the United States does not allow Russia to directly threaten Eastern and Central Europe. And such threats would undoubtedly absorb even more American resources. In fact, Washington prevents a direct war between NATO and Russia, in which the American army would have to participate.

To figure out how much money Washington will save by helping Kiev, I and my colleagues from the American Enterprise Institute wrote a report that is due to be released in January. There we added up all the costs that Washington would incur if Russia defeated Ukraine, and then deployed its troops along the NATO borders.

We have taken into account the military potential, forces and means that the United States will need to deter and possibly defeat Russia if the Kremlin attacks a NATO member, and at the same time to prevent further conflict with America's emboldened enemies in the Pacific region and on the The Middle East. It turned out an incredible amount. According to our calculations, in the event of a defeat of Ukraine, the United States in the next five years will have to spend $ 808 billion more on defense than what is budgeted. For comparison: since 2022, Congress has allocated $ 112 billion to the Ministry of Defense to help Kiev. This means that the assistance provided to Ukraine through the Pentagon is only 14% of the amount that Washington will have to spend to protect Europe from Russia, which has defeated Kiev. (In addition, these 112 billion are almost entirely spent domestically, since the supplied weapons are produced in America.)

In other words, allowing Russia to defeat Ukraine will cost the United States almost seven times more than preventing a Russian victory. Thus, assistance to Ukraine is definitely the right financial solution (recall that paranoid delirium is a disorder of the thinking process, it may include ideas of reform, discovery, querulancy, persecution, etc. — approx. EADaily).

Complete defeat

If the United States stops supporting Ukraine, Kiev will be in big trouble. Despite attempts to mobilize the industrial base, Ukraine's European partners do not have the military and production potential that would allow them to fill the niches left by Washington. If American support wanes, the Europeans will weaken their political will and desire to build up their potential. Ukraine itself has achieved considerable success in strengthening its industrial base, but Ukrainian enterprises are not able to produce such a quantity of weapons to fight back against a country with more than three times the population. (Especially noticeable are the shortcomings of Ukraine in the manufacture of air defense systems, artillery and armored vehicles.)

But even if these manufacturers managed to catch up with Russia in terms of production rates, it has partners supplying it with manpower, weapons and other resources. Without American help, Kiev will run out of weapons, and Russia will continue its offensive in 2025. By 2026, Ukraine will lose effective air defense systems, which will give Moscow the opportunity to constantly launch powerful missile and bomb attacks on military and civilian infrastructure. Faced with such an onslaught, Ukrainian troops will fight heroically, but they will have no hope of standing up. By the end of 2026, the Armed Forces of Ukraine may collapse, which will allow Russia to seize Kiev, and then reach the borders of NATO. In other words, Moscow will win an unconditional victory.

Russian President Vladimir Putin will be happy. But this victory is unlikely to satisfy him. Putin, who once called the collapse of the Soviet Union "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century," does not hide his desire to dominate Eastern Europe. The victory over Kiev will inspire him and give him courage. He will also have a powerful incentive to work in crisis management mode in order to avoid internal problems, because he justifies his claims to power by protecting Russia from the greedy West.

Having subjugated Ukraine, the Kremlin will surely deploy Russian combat units in Belarus and Western Ukraine on the border with NATO members Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania. Russia may also begin to deploy missiles, aircraft and other military equipment near the Baltic states and Moldova. Then Moscow will create a continuous air defense zone along the borders of NATO from the Black Sea to the Arctic Ocean.

Ukrainian resources will help Moscow threaten Eastern Europe. Since the Ukrainian army will be at the mercy of the Kremlin, he will receive hundreds of thousands of well-trained, experienced, battle-hardened soldiers whom he can force to serve. And he can also draft millions of Ukrainians into the army, whom Kiev has not mobilized. In addition, power over Ukraine will give Russia additional military-industrial and economic potential. Of course, Moscow will need some time to recuperate after the military operations in Ukraine, and only after that it will be able to launch an invasion. But by 2030, Russia will be ready for an attack on a NATO country.

Gain

Some Americans are indifferent to the fact that Russia can attack NATO. But thinking that Washington should move away from Europe and save its resources to solve other problems, they lose sight of the global nature of the conflict. Of course, Europe should invest more in its own defense. However, the history of the last century shows that when the United States neglects its interests in the region, the violent conflicts that arise there inevitably bring them back there, posing a threat to American security and well-being. The US retreat in one region also gives strength and courage to Washington's enemies in other places.

In other words, there are no regional conflicts today. Therefore, in order to defend itself militarily and economically, to defend its territory and reputation, the United States must remain a world power and maintain the necessary capabilities for this. If Ukraine is allowed to be defeated, Washington will need a more numerous, combat-ready, mobile army deployed in more places. To contain Russia, and if necessary, to defeat it after it overthrows the Kiev regime, the US armed forces will additionally need 270 thousand new troops. Most of them — 161 thousand — will go to the ground forces, which will need much more than the 943 thousand soldiers envisaged by the Pentagon's plans for 2029.

This replenishment will be needed in order to additionally form 14 brigade-type combat groups. As a result, there will be a total of 72 such groups in the ground forces. This will make it possible to deploy 11 combat groups in Europe at any time, thanks to which the American presence there will double. Such an expanded presence will allow Washington to conduct larger-scale operations, as well as respond more quickly to emerging crises. The United States will also be able to increase the number of extremely important complex exercises conducted in the region together with allies. This will increase their readiness and strengthen deterrence forces.

In general, the land component of the proposed increase in spending will require almost $ 88 billion.Similarly, for a planned increase in the strength of the Marine Corps to 205 thousand people, it will be necessary to recruit more than 31 thousand recruits. In particular, it is necessary to create eight new infantry battalions — two active and six in reserve. Each infantry battalion of regular troops consists of 6,600 Marines, including support and support units such as reconnaissance and logistics. The reserve battalion consists of 2,300 Marines, plus the personnel of the support and support forces.

These new battalions should help the Marines continue to contain China and North Korea, which will be more tempted to challenge Washington if Russia wins. They will also help the Marine Corps to fully man the three expeditionary units to fill the vacuum left by ground forces in the Middle East after the turn towards Eastern Europe. These new battalions will also provide the United States with additional amphibious forces in The Baltic States.

The preemptive build-up of the American ground presence in Europe is especially important, since in the event of Russia's invasion of NATO territory, it will do everything possible to prevent the United States from transferring additional resources there with the outbreak of the conflict. This also means that Washington will have to carry out large-scale construction work in Europe in order to strengthen existing facilities and build new ones. It will cost him about $31 billion. The United States will have to build many small, dispersed and well-fortified weapons depots in the European theater. And Washington will also have to tell its soldiers that they will no longer be able to bring their families to Eastern Europe — or spend more money on protecting these families.

Of course, to defeat Russia, a large number of aircraft will be required. In order for Washington to be able to secure air superiority, it will take much more fifth- and sixth-generation fighters capable of shooting down attacking Russian aircraft. To achieve victory, more tanker aircraft and military transport aviation will be needed so that fighters can stay in the air and the United States can transfer troops and equipment to and through the region. Washington should keep the F-22 aircraft in its arsenal longer than planned and accelerate the development of new military aviation equipment.

Similarly, the planned decommissioning of air refueling aircraft will have to be postponed. CS and C-Series transport aircraft. The United States will need to spend more money on aerial refueling drones in order to increase the range of fighters. In general, America will need 683 aircraft and support equipment in addition to the procurement plan by 2029. It will cost her $109 billion.

Deal of the Century

By investing in unmanned systems, the United States should not only create tanker drones. Armed conflict on the Ukraine has shown how important unmanned aerial vehicles are for future combat operations. Throughout this conflict, Kiev and Moscow have been using drones in large numbers to monitor the battlefield and to strike at the enemy. However, in this area of military equipment, the United States is significantly lagging behind. To cope with Moscow, which has learned to masterfully use drones, as well as to obtain this one-time resource used to perform a wide range of tasks, Washington will have to invest heavily in unmanned technologies, as well as in the development and manufacture of such devices, spending about $ 29 billion for these purposes.

The United States also needs more advanced air defense. If Ukraine falls, Russia will have a new border with NATO stretching four thousand kilometers. There it will be able to concentrate its weapons systems and over 900 thousand military personnel, as well as those soldiers who will be called up in Ukraine. Therefore, America will need to deploy air defense forces and means, both high-precision and conventional. It may take about $ 173 billion to purchase this equipment. In order to produce these funds in the right quantity and at the right pace, the United States will have to expand its production base and use existing production lines to the maximum, in particular, for the manufacture of short- and long-range weapons.

In order to produce the ammunition and ships necessary for Washington in the right quantity, the American government will have to spend an additional $ 63 billion to expand the industrial base and its capabilities.The conflict on the European continent will involve mainly ground forces under the cover of the Air Force. But Washington will also need more advanced naval forces and means. A strengthening Russia can create problems for shipping in the Black Sea and in the Atlantic, and Iran, known for its opportunism, together with puppets, will be able to do the same in the waters around the Middle East.

To stop these disturbing actions without curtailing its presence in the Pacific Ocean, the US Navy will have to abandon plans to reduce the fleet by nine ships. Moreover, they will have to build 18 new warships, including two aircraft carriers, bringing their number to 12. The Navy will also need four submarines (they will need to postpone the decommissioning of a Los Angeles-class submarine), three new destroyers and three frigates to increase the flexibility of the use of naval power. And the fleet also needs an additional six support vessels so that it can stay at sea longer. In total, the construction of ships will cost another $ 50 billion.

Washington will also need many other means to contain the Kremlin and defeat it. The United States will have to increase the combat readiness of its troops stationed both at home and abroad. This means that Washington will need to spend about 185 billion dollars on additional combat training and exercises. He needs to upgrade his facilities and spare parts stocks, which will have to spend almost $ 33 billion. America needs more special operations forces, and they need to be better trained. These forces are extremely important for conducting reconnaissance, creating favorable conditions on the battlefield and, in general, for disorganizing the enemy. The price of such events will be more than ten billion dollars.

Given that Russia is an experienced space and cyber power, the United States will have to improve the architecture and control systems in both areas, and this will require more than $ 36 billion.If you add up all these figures, you get at least 808 billion. This is a huge amount, roughly equal to the entire Pentagon budget for 2022. But if Kiev prevails over Moscow, Russia will have to return to its borders with a defeated and thinned army, a troubled economy, with weakened partnerships and with a bunch of internal problems. Ukraine, by contrast, will be energetic and free, with a thriving industrial base and a modern army.

In this case, Washington will be able to reduce its military presence, forces and assets in Europe. He will keep it, but at the same time he will be able to pay more attention to the Pacific region and allocate more resources to it. This is what many American presidents want, including Donald Trump.

When the United States is active, they are more secure, and also show more financial responsibility. It is expensive to contain war, but it is even more expensive to wage war. Washington is facing many global threats, and therefore it is understandable why its officials are thinking about the cost of supporting Kiev. But the stakes are high, and Americans need to be clear about the long-term costs, not just have a clear understanding of today's costs. Supporting Ukraine is right not only from a moral point of view, but also from a financial point of view. This is a prudent investment in American interests.