Foreign Policy Research Institute

укр
eng
+38 (044) 287 52 58

Foreign Policy Research Institute

tel. +38 (044) 287 52 58

Joseph Biden’s visit to Ukraine and Poland: did it mark the beginning of the implementation and rethinking of the American foreign policy strategy towards Russia?

Photo: Volodymyr Zelenskyy meets Joe Biden in Kyiv
Source: The Kyiv Independent

Before the anniversary of the Russian all-out invasion to Ukraine, the President of the United States of America, Joseph Biden, unexpectedly visited Kyiv. The trip of the American president was planned in the nearest future to Warsaw, however, after landing at the Rammstein Air Base, Biden continued his journey to Rzeszów and further to Kyiv.

It was the first visit of an American president to Ukraine in 15 years. This trip was full of symbolism and contained a powerful signal to the Russian leadership. Last year, Putin thought that Kyiv would soon fall. However, a year later, the capital of Ukraine is not visited by the Russian president, but by the American one, and he meets with the man whom the leading world media has repeatedly called the leader of the free world - the President of Ukraine.

In his speech in Kyiv, Joe Biden emphasized that many did not believe that Ukraine would be able to fight back against Russia, but "Kyiv stands and Ukraine stands... and America stands with you"[1], the US President said. In fact, Joe Biden thus has admitted that he himself did not believe in the possible success of Ukraine. However, the resistance of the Ukrainian people forced the US to reconsider its posture and gradually increase aid to Ukraine. The main motive of Joe Biden's speech was support for Ukraine and the unity of partner countries around this issue.

The 80-year-old Biden made a 20-hour trip across the Atlantic to the warring country, although before that he persistently refused this idea. The visit of the American president to the warring country testified to the reassessment of the place and role of Ukraine in the American strategy. If earlier Washington agreed that Ukraine is a periphery of Russia, now the success of Ukraine means the success of the United States of America. That is why Ukraine continues to receive military and economic support, and in relations between Ukraine and the USA, as well as the countries of the Group of Seven and the EU, one of the constant main topics of discussion is the issue of Ukraine's implementation of democratic reforms. It is not enough to end the war in favor of Ukraine. Ukraine must become a successful democracy. Currently, Ukraine is considered by the USA as a NATO outpost in Eastern Europe, the first line of defense of the Alliance and a place where, in the event of an armed confrontation, combat operations will take place.

In the public space, high-ranking officials of NATO member states, Britain, Poland, and the United States are already talking about the need to provide security guarantees to Ukraine. However, this vision does not provide for the inclusion of Ukraine in the North Atlantic Alliance, which contrasts with Ukraine's strategic course towards full membership in the EU and NATO. Currently, the discussion refers to providing Ukraine with the means to ensure its own security, increasing its capacity for self-defense to such a level that Russia will not be able to carry out a repeated attack. Such a model of security interaction is contained in the document "Kyiv Security Compact" proposed by the Ukrainian side.

At the same time, the role of the main partner of the USA in Eastern Europe is assigned to Poland, where Joe Biden went after meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. There, the US president addressed the Polish population and held a meeting with the leaders of the Bucharest Nine (B9) countries. The American president's speeches in Kyiv and Warsaw were made before and after Vladimir Putin's annual address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. It was a measured move that first allowed Biden to send a signal about the role of the United States in Ukraine, and then to respond to the statements of the Russian president.

In Poland, the speech was focused on Euro-Atlantic unity, the strength of the Ukrainian nation and the generosity of the Polish people. Poland has become one of the main lobbyists of support to Ukraine. The state has provided Ukraine with substantial military aid in the form of heavy equipment and other types of weapons and accepted the largest part of Ukrainian refugees. In a military dimension, Poland has become weaker, due to the transfer of its own weapons to Ukraine, in particular more than 270 tanks, including the modern Leopard 2. At the same time, the state is already replacing the old transferred equipment with the latest types of weapons. Poland ordered 1,400 of the latest domestic-made Borsuk BMPs. The country receives 100 Abrams tanks from the USA and purchases about 250-300 more. Warsaw is modernizing the German "Leopards-2", purchasing American F-35 fighters, additional Patriot air defense systems, Korean light fighters, as well as Korean K-2 tanks, K-9 self-propelled guns. Together with the states of the Bucharest Nine, Poland confirmed its intention to further strengthen the defense capability of NATO's Eastern flank, which is happening against the background of the weakening of the Russian Federation's capabilities due to losses in Ukraine. NATO's eastern flank is being strengthened, and the bloc is returning from security to defense tasks. In the future, the US will continue to invest in military infrastructure in the B9 countries to deter Russia.

Although the Russian Federation has weakened significantly in relative terms, the USA is still trying to prevent a crushing defeat of the Russian Federation on the battlefield. Ukraine receives significantly more assistance in armaments compared to the beginning of the war, which indicates the desire of the partner countries to ensure the victory of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the battlefield. Annual US aid to Ukraine already outpaces Washington's annual spending on Afghanistan between 2001 and 2010. At the same time, the USA is trying to avoid a crushing defeat of Russia, which could lead to the disintegration of the aggressor state. In the event of Russia's defeat, new challenges would arise before the NATO countries: the threat of the proliferation of nuclear weapons; the emergence of many entities in the space of the former Russian Federation, for influence over which they would have to compete with the PRC; possible strengthening of the PRC in case of annexation of Far Eastern territories; or civil war in Russia with potential associated risks. The United States needs a strategy that would offer options for the development of events in case of Russia's disintegration. A clear vision of different scenarios and their possible consequences can help the leaders of the partner countries to make decisive and reasonable decisions.

Ukraine still remains outside NATO, however, it is now part of the strategic interests of the United States. This was confirmed by Joe Biden's visit to Ukraine and Poland. The role of an outpost of the democratic world in Eastern Europe is assigned to Ukraine, and the leading powers, in particular the USA and Great Britain, have already expressed their readiness to provide security guarantees for Ukraine in the form of institutionalizing military aid obligations. Thus, Ukraine will strengthen its defense capabilities, but will remain outside the scope of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. And while Russia's capabilities are diminishing, and Ukraine is getting more and more weapons, NATO's eastern flank is strengthening, because Russian aggression has finally prompted member states to rearm. A weakened Russia is a useful tool that accelerates this process, and at this stage, due to the possible negative consequences of a potential collapse of Russia, the USA is comfortable with a strategy of controlled escalation, when Russia is not so weak to the level that would lead to the collapse of the Russian Federation, but at the same time already in the near future will not pose a threat to NATO. However, this approach has its own DISADVANTAGES. First, NATO's advantage over Russia is achieved at the expense of Ukrainian lives. Secondly, authoritarian states are closely monitoring the development of events in the Russian-Ukrainian war. China and Iran are increasingly involved in the war and are gradually increasing their support for the Kremlin. If Russia had been defeated at the end of last year, the European security order would have already been restored. The North Atlantic Alliance would be stronger than ever and could focus entirely on the Asian region and the Middle East. However, this has not happened. And the longer the Russian-Ukrainian war lasts, the longer will be the economic consequences for the countries of the Euro-Atlantic space. All the more authoritarian regimes will unite around Putin's Russia, which will further prolong the war. Ukraine must defeat Russia on the battlefield already this year, and therefore pressure on Russia and support for Ukraine must be increased. If this does not happen, the war may drag on, which, in the context of the Iranian nuclear program and the desire of the PRC to establish control over Taiwan, creates threats not only for Ukraine, but for the United States and the North Atlantic Alliance.
 


Sources:

1. Байден в Києві оголосив пакет додаткової допомоги Україні, 20.02.2023,
URL: https://ukrainian.voanews.com/a/6970425.html