Washington (CNN) — As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has morphed into a harsh war of attrition, with no peace deal in sight, the United States and its allies are seeking a new long-term goal: to defeat Russia so forcefully that it deters Moscow from launching another similar attack in the future.
That message was conveyed more clearly on Monday, when the US Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, told reporters – after a visit to Ukraine’s capital Kyiv – that his country wants “to see Russia weakened to the point where it cannot do the kind of things it has done by invading Ukraine.”
A National Security Council spokesman said Austin’s comments were in line with US goals, which are “to make this invasion a strategic failure for Russia.”
“We want Ukraine to win,” the spokesman added. “One of our goals has been to limit Russia’s ability to do something like this again, as Secretary Austin said. That’s why we’re arming Ukrainians with weapons and equipment so they can defend themselves against Russian attacks, and why we’re using sanctions and export controls that are directly targeted at Russia’s defense industry. We seek to undermine Russia’s economic and military power by threatening and attacking its neighbors.”
US officials traveling with Austin said this is a message the defense secretary planned to reiterate, according to a senior Biden administration official. That Russia will emerge from the conflict weaker than before is an idea that has been referenced by other administration officials. US officials, however, had previously been reluctant to state so clearly that the US goal is to see Russia fail and neutralize itself militarily in the long run, remaining cautiously optimistic that some kind of negotiated settlement could be reached.
An Eastern European official told CNN that mindset was incredibly frustrating. “The only solution to this is for Ukraine to win,” he said.
The change in strategy has come in recent weeks, evidenced by a growing tolerance for increased risk with the shipment of more complex Western weaponry, and is a reflection of the belief that Putin’s goals in Ukraine would not end if he succeeds in seizing from Ukraine, just as it did not after the annexation of Crimea in 2014, a British diplomat said.
“Even if they come up with some solution where [Putin] get some of the Donbas and everything sits idle, logic would dictate that there is further to go on this. Therefore, what can be brought out of the battlefield this time is not only a short-term victory, but also a longer-term strategy.”
Weakening Russia is an achievable goal for the West
There is a growing understanding between US and Western officials – especially after the massacre of civilians by the Russians in the Ukrainian city of Bucha— that Russia needs to be hurt both economically and on the battlefield for its aggression to stop forever, US and Western officials told CNN.
“He’s already lost a lot of military capability,” Austin said. “And a lot of their troops, frankly. And we want them to not be able to reproduce that ability very quickly.”
Biden administration officials are optimistic that is an achievable goal, sources told CNN. Administration officials and congressional sources said they believe continued military support for Ukraine could result in significant blows to Russia that will affect its long-term military capabilities, strategically benefiting the US.
The United States has already begun sending more heavy and sophisticated equipment to Ukraine that it had refrained from providing in the past, including 72 howitzers and Phoenix Ghost tactical drones.
“The way we’re looking at this is that he’s making an investment to neutralize the Russian Army and Navy for the next decade,” said a congressional source familiar with ongoing military assistance to Ukraine.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Monday that while “obviously the war is in Ukraine right now,” the United States and its allies “also seek to prevent [Rusia] expand your efforts and President Putin’s goals beyond that.”
A delicate “balancing act”
The officials noted, however, that the United States and its allies are treading fine lines when it comes to penalizing Russia, both because of the collateral damage that harsh sanctions could have on the global economy and because of the risk that Putin could lash out at the country if they corner it too much.
A source familiar with US intelligence assessments of Russia said there is “certainly a balancing act that needs to be taken into account” in punishing the country, “either in the sanctions space or in the military and security support space.” intelligence”.
The source added that while the United States still assesses that Putin’s red lines for nuclear weapons use have not changed, “one of those red lines is regime stability,” they said, meaning Putin could lash out if he feels that his government is seriously threatened.
A US official said separately that he believes Austin’s comments were not helpful for that reason, and because they 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 “whatever happens, the United States and NATO are going to weaken you,” this official said, but that the West will try to punish Russia while it is at war with Ukraine.
A State Department spokesman said that the sanctions that the United States and its allies have implemented against Russia are “all in response to Putin’s war of aggression in Ukraine. They are intended to prevent Putin from buying more ammunition, weapons, missiles, to stop it” and to stop financing his war machine, to stop the killing. They also intend to punish those who actively support Putin’s brutal and unprovoked war. This is not about harming the Russian people.”
It is still unclear what the United States would do about sanctions if Russia reached a meaningful peace deal with Ukraine and withdrew its forces. Multiple sources told CNN that in such a scenario, the United States would likely consider lifting some sanctions, in a show of good faith, while maintaining others. The United States and its allies, including the United Kingdom, have also been weighing the feasibility of a “rollback” mechanism that would allow them to quickly reimpose sanctions should Moscow violate agreements reached with Kyiv, the sources said.
But with the conflict still ongoing and prospects for a peace deal looking increasingly bleak, those options are a long way from being implemented, officials said. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in March that Russia’s change in behavior must be “irreversible” before the United States considers lifting sanctions.
“They will want to make sure that whatever is done is, in fact, irreversible, that this cannot happen again, that Russia does not come back in a year or two years or three years and does exactly what it is doing,” Blinken said in a statement. interview with NPR.
The changing concerns about the escalation of the war
Russia’s poor performance and significant battlefield losses have contributed significantly to the increasingly emboldened posture of the United States, officials said.
While Washington has been concerned that the heavy artillery shipment could be seen as a provocation, Biden has announced billions of dollars in tank, missile and ammunition shipments over the past month, indicating that some initial concerns about the escalation of the conflict have subsided.
The United States is also preparing to train Ukraine’s armed forces in more advanced, NATO-compliant weapons systems, Austin told reporters Monday, a move that will allow the United States and its allies to provide more powerful weapons to Ukraine more fast, as those systems are more readily available than the Soviet-era equipment the West has had to seek out to date.
“There are a number of changes happening simultaneously,” the British diplomat said. “One is looking at future capabilities and that’s related to the most modern artillery and weaponry. Two, let’s eliminate what’s on the battlefield.”
Biden himself has been steadily ramping up the rhetoric in describing Putin, from calling him a war criminal to saying he cannot stay in power and accusing him of committing genocide, despite concerns among some of his advisers that the language could make Putin lash out.
But the president has downplayed those concerns privately, according to people familiar with the talks, saying that articulating what is clearly evident is more important than risking potential escalation. And he has stressed that Russia’s military capabilities do not appear as strong as the United States believed.
Ambassador Nathan Sales, who until 2021 served as Acting Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy and Human Rights at the State Department, said the “bottom line” is that “a weaker Russia means a more stable world” and that the United States The United States must prepare for its Russia policy
“As long as Putin is in charge, Russia will be a malign actor,” he said. “So we cannot expect Russia to be a constructive and responsible actor in Europe or in the broader international system.”
Sales added that the United States should therefore prepare for “an extended period” of its Russia policy aimed at limiting its ability “to cause predetermined damage around the world.”