How quickly will Democratic resolve to defeat Russia's invasion of Ukraine evaporate now that the word is out through media stenographers that the Biden administration isn't happy with Zelensky and doesn't trust him?
Russia's offensive in the Donbas is sputtering and narrow; Ukraine's telegraphed southern counteroffensive has yet to fully develop, giving time for Russia to shift troops to that front. Western logistics and intelligence support give Ukraine an advantage in a longer war. But the West needs to provide that support for the duration. Is this situation unacceptable to America? Does America prefer the war to be over soon regardless of the outcome?
Why is the White House quietly griping about Zelensky now (tip to Instapundit)?
Joe Biden now finds himself in a proxy war with Russia, and he never wanted to be in one. Before Russia invaded, he let slip that a “minor incursion” might not trigger a full U.S. or NATO response. Biden sees the mounting consequences of the Russian invasion – higher energy and food prices, a global famine, a potential cold winter for western Europe – and probably just wants to get out of this mess; if Ukraine has to make some territorial concessions, well, the U.S. was never that interested in who controlled the Donbas region anyway.
That's easy enough to answer, eh? Biden's people are trying to throw Ukraine--via Zelensky--under the bus.
I think the White House assumed Russia would have won by now. I think the White House hoped to get credit for supplying a valiant but doomed Ukraine.
I think Biden's people want to cut and run just as they did in Afghanistan because they have more important things to do--like spending money we don't have at home. A few billion dollars worth of Javelin missiles to bolster Joe's poll numbers and then we'd get Reset 2.0 with Russia and a glorious green energy revolution!
Can you say Nobel Peace Prize?
And it isn't like Biden is the only Westerner looking for excuses to throw Ukraine under the bus tank. Indeed, I'm horrified that there are Republicans who think we should abandon Ukraine to the Russians! Russia's bluster despite its poor performance on the battlefield convinces many that it is futile to resist Russia. Don't fall for that bluff. Russia lies. A lot.
I've said Ukraine has a lot riding on their looming counter-offensive. The Ukrainians really do need a sense of urgency to build on the slight tilt they've achieved on the battlefield. It seems that it is not only important to inflict a battlefield defeat on Russia's ground forces for its effect on Russia. A victory may also be needed to shame the American government--and other Western states--into not abandoning Ukraine when it is inconvenient to their domestic political needs.
There's a reason America's resolute response to Russia's invasion surprised me. Being resolute probably wasn't what the administration intended.
UPDATE: This author thinks Ukraine needs serial "miracles" to defeat Russia on the Kherson front. The Ukrainians have a huge job to pull this off, but I don't think God needs to intervene.
Russian air power has under-performed and may be nullified sufficiently; precision Ukrainian artillery may nullify Russia's numerical artillery advantage sufficiently; and Ukraine may be able to build and defend supply lines across the Dnieper to push deeper.
Big challenges. But Russia faces morale, equipment, and supply problems. Still, he is right that thus far the big offensive is "ink deep".
UPDATE: This occurred to me early:
Note that a Ukrainian drive from Zaporozhzhia down to Melitopol would unhinge Russian positions in Kherson province.
But I worried that it would expose two flanks open to Russian counterattacks from east and west.
On the other hand, if Ukraine pushes Russians to the Dneipr River on the Kherson front and can't mount a river crossing, a drive toward Melitopol from the north might be a better second stage.
UPDATE (Tuesday): What is going on around Izyum?
NOTE: ISW updates continue here.
