Yes, there was Russian pressure, Western fear, and Ukrainian divisions to explain it, but Ukraine did not join NATO and has not been on a path for membership. Indeed, as I understand it, Ukraine did not qualify because Russia had a base in Ukraine, which is against NATO rules.
Obviously, that block against membership is gone going forward.
But whatever the past, Ukraine is not a member of NATO and even if we had the logistics network in eastern NATO to project significant forces into Ukraine, we should not. It would be a terrible message to send that you can get NATO protection without joining NATO and contributing to NATO actions.
Yet as a member of the international community that is being subjected to Russian aggression in violation of both the United Nations charter and the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine deserves help in defending itself.
And this is entirely inadequate help:
The United States is working on a package of non-lethal aid for Ukraine that could include medical supplies and clothing, but would stop short of providing body armor and other military-style equipment, U.S. officials said Wednesday.
Good grief.
Major weapons are pointless. Ukraine can't integrate new weapons into their military on short notice. But we could send body armor and look for spare parts and ammo among our new NATO allies who are shedding Soviet-era equipment.
And we could help with communications gear and night vision equipment. Our main role should be to help Ukraine use what it already has to maximum potential and fill in gaps with easy-to-adopt equipment. Heck, could the Ukrainians use trucks for logistics?
Socks and MREs are great, but the Ukrainians need to be able to fight and maneuver--and survive.
Do we really believe that we are signalling firm resolve with Russia by escalating from MREs to socks and maybe upping the ante to tents and eventually to dreaded flashlights if the Russians continue to provoke unrest?
Help Ukraine fight and survive. That's the signal to send.
