A spokesman for the National Security Council said Austin’s comments were consistent with what the US has been pursuing for months — “to make this invasion a strategic failure for Russia.”
“We want Ukraine to win,” added the spokesman. “One of our goals was to limit Russia’s ability to do something like this again, as Secretary Austin said. That’s why we arm and equip Ukrainians with weapons and equipment to defend against Russian attacks, and that’s why we use sanctions and export controls aimed directly at Russia’s defense industries to undermine Russia’s economic and military power to threaten its neighbors and attack.”
US officials who traveled with Austin said he wanted to repeat the message, according to a senior administration official. Russia emerging from the conflict weaker than before is an idea to which other Biden administration officials have referred. However, US officials have previously been reluctant to say so clearly that the US goal is to see Russia fail and militarily castrate the long-term, remaining cautiously optimistic that some sort of negotiated settlement could be reached.
An Eastern European official told CNN the mentality was incredibly frustrating. “The only solution to this is for Ukraine to win,” he said.
The shift in strategy has occurred in recent weeks, evidenced by a growing tolerance for increased risk when more sophisticated Western weaponry is used, and reflecting a belief that Putin’s goals in Ukraine would not end if he made one Seizing part of Ukraine like they didn’t do after the 2014 annexation of Crimea, a British diplomat said.
“Even if they find a solution where (Putin) gets a little bit of the Donbass and everything rests, logic would dictate that there are more ways to walk in it. So what you can take off the battlefield in this window isn’t just a short-term win, it’s also a longer-term strategy.”
Now there is a growing realization among US and Western officials – particularly after the Russians’ massacre of civilians in the Ukrainian city of Bucha – that Russia must be wounded enough economically and on the battlefield that its aggression will be halted for good, US officials said and Western officials told CNN.
“So it’s already lost a lot of military potential,” Austin said. “And a lot of his troops, frankly. And we want to see that they don’t have the ability to reproduce that ability very quickly.”
Biden administration officials are optimistic that this is an achievable goal, sources told CNN. Government officials and congressional sources said they believe continued military support to Ukraine could result in significant blows to Russia that would impair its long-term military capabilities and strategically benefit the US.
The US has already begun sending heavier and more sophisticated equipment to Ukraine that it has refrained from sending in the past, including 72 howitzers and Phoenix Ghost tactical drones.
“In our view, this is an investment to neuter the Russian army and navy for the next decade,” said a congressional source familiar with ongoing military aid to Ukraine.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Monday that the US and its allies are “also trying to prevent (Russia) from expanding their efforts and President Putin’s goals beyond that, despite the “obvious war in the world right now.” Ukraine is”. “
A delicate “balancing act”
But officials noted that the US and its allies are cautious about punishing Russia — both because of the collateral damage tough sanctions could have on the global economy and the risk that Putin could strike if he’s backed too far into a corner .
A source familiar with US intelligence assessments of Russia said “there is certainly a balancing act that needs to be considered” in punishing the country, “be it in the area of sanctions or in the area of military and intelligence support”.
This person added that while the US still assumes that Putin’s red line on using nuclear weapons hasn’t changed, “one of those red lines is regime stability,” they said — meaning Putin is lashing out could, if he feels his rule is under serious threat.
A US official said separately that he believed Austin’s comments were unhelpful for this reason and because it could play into the Russian propaganda line that NATO and US support for Ukraine is a power play.
The goal is not to tell the Russians that “the US and NATO will definitely weaken you,” said this official, but that the West will aim to punish Russia as long as it is at war with Ukraine .
A State Department spokesman said the sanctions imposed by the US and its allies are “all in response to Putin’s war of aggression in Ukraine. They are designed to prevent Putin from buying more ammunition, weapons and missiles – to prevent him from funding his war machine to stop the killing. They are also designed to punish those who actively support Putin’s unprovoked, brutal war. It is not about harming the Russian people.”
It’s still unclear what the US would do in terms of sanctions if Russia reached a meaningful peace deal with Ukraine and withdrew its forces. Multiple sources told CNN that in this scenario, the US would likely lift some sanctions in good faith and maintain others. The US and allies, including the UK, have also been considering the feasibility of a “snapback” mechanism that would allow them to quickly re-impose sanctions should Moscow breach agreements with Kyiv, the sources said.
But with the conflict still raging and prospects for a peace deal dimming, those options are still a long way off, officials said. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in March Russia’s change in behavior must be “irreversible” before the US considers lifting sanctions.
“They’re going to want to make sure that everything that’s been done is actually irreversible, that it can’t happen again, that Russia doesn’t pick up in a year or two or three years and do exactly what it’s doing,” Blinken said in an interview with NPR.
Postpone worries about escalation
Russia’s poor performance and heavy battlefield casualties have contributed significantly to the increasingly bolder US stance, officials said.
While Washington was previously concerned that the deployment of heavy artillery could be viewed as a provocation, Biden has announced billions of dollars in new shipments of tanks, missiles and ammunition for the past month, an indication that some initial concerns about an escalation of the conflict have eased .
The US is also preparing to train Ukraine’s armed forces in more modern, NATO-ready weapons systems, Austin told reporters Monday — a move that will allow the US and its allies to provide Ukraine with more powerful weapons more quickly, since these systems are more readily available than the Soviet-era equipment that the West has had to search for.
“There are a number of shifts happening at the same time,” said the British diplomat. “One looks at future capabilities and that relates to artillery and more modern weaponry. Second, let’s eliminate what’s on the battlefield.”
Biden himself has steadily escalated the rhetoric used in describing Putin — from labeling him a war criminal to saying he cannot remain in power and charging him with genocide — despite fears from some of his advisers that the language will mislead Putin could, to whip out.
However, according to people familiar with the talks, the president has privately downplayed those concerns, saying it is more important to articulate what is clearly obvious than risk possible escalation. And he has stressed that Russia’s military capabilities do not appear as strong as the US once believed.
Ambassador Nathan Sales, who served as acting undersecretary for civil security, democracy and human rights at the State Department until 2021, said the “bottom line” is that “a weaker Russia means a more stable world” and that the US should prepare itself on his Russia policy
“As long as Putin is in charge, Russia will be a malicious actor,” he said. “Therefore, we cannot hope that Russia will be a constructive and responsible actor in Europe or in the broader international system.” Sales added that the US should therefore prepare for a “prolonged period” of its Russia policy aimed at limiting its ability , “to wreak havoc around the world”.