[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 112 (Monday, July 8, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4224-S4226]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UKRAINE
Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the attached
article entitled ``Lessons from Ukraine'' by Alan W. Dowd in the
American Legion Magazine be printed in the Congressional Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Lessons From Ukraine
(By Alan W. Dowd)
Russia's war on Ukraine serves as a preview of what a 21st-
century great-power war might look like. The glimmer of
hopeful news amid the grim cruelties of Putin's war is that
we have a chance to prevent the next great-power war--but
only if we learn lessons from this one.
Modern warfare between industrially developed countries
devours personnel and resources. The Russian military has
lost approximately 120,000 killed in action in two years of
war. By way of comparison, the USSR lost 15,000 in
Afghanistan in a decade. Russia has lost 2,742 tanks, 5,031
armored vehicles/APCs/IFVs, 135 helicopters, 103 fixed-wing
aircraft, 20 surface ships and one submarine.
Ukraine's losses are more appalling: some 70,000 troops and
100,000 civilians killed. Ukraine has lost 742 tanks, 1,603
armored vehicles/APCs/ IFVs, 80 fixed-wing aircraft and 28
warships. Europe hasn't seen this kind of war in 80 years.
The United States hasn't endured such a war since Korea. To
be sure, America engaged in costly operations during the
postwar era. Afghanistan, Iraq and other fronts of the war on
terrorism claimed more than 7,000 American lives--over a span
of 20 years. Vietnam claimed more than 58,000 Americans--
again, over a span of 20 years. Korea claimed 37,900
Americans in just 37 months.
Yet none of those conflicts and none of America's
battlefield foes since World War II--not Kim Il-Sung or Ho
Chi Minh, not Saddam Hussein or Slobodan Milosevic, not
Taliban terrorists or Hezbollah's henchmen, not Osama bin
Laden or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi--represented the military-
technological-industrial threat of a peer-adversary.
Put another way, the war in Ukraine offers a glimpse of
what a PRC assault on Taiwan, Russian attack on NATO or
Korean War II would unleash. Such a conflict would produce
massive front line combat losses. But it wouldn't be neatly
quarantined ``over there.'' It would scar the U.S. homeland
through cyber, missile, drone, nuclear, biological and/or
satellite attacks. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall
describes it as the ``kind of war we have no modern
experience with''--which is why America must return to the
time-tested principle of deterrence.
Deterring war is far less costly than waging war. ``Freedom
must be armed better than tyranny,'' President Volodymyr
Zelensky of Ukraine observes. When it's not, the result is
Ukraine 2022, Korea 1950, Pearl Harbor 1941. With Russia on
the march, China on the rise, North Korea setting the free
world on edge, and Iran and its Hamas-Hezbollah-Houthi
proxies setting the Middle East on fire, larger investments
in defense are desperately needed. The good news is that 27
NATO members have increased defense spending. Poland is
devoting 4% of GDP to the common defense. Germany is nearly
doubling defense spending. Japan will soon boast the world's
third-largest defense budget. South Korea's defense budget
has jumped 37% in recent years, Australia's 47%.
The bad news is that, even as threats metastasize, U.S.
defense spending hovers in the 3%-of GDP range. As a result,
the Army is trying to deter war in Europe with one third the
soldiers it deployed during the Cold War. Navy leaders say
they need 500 ships; they have 296. Only 14% of the Air Force
bomber fleet could survive peer-adversary air defenses.
These numbers call to mind Winston Churchill's warning that
``we cannot afford . . . to work on narrow margins, offering
temptations to a trial of strength.'' Churchill understood
the benefits of deterrence and the dangers of shortchanging
defense. So should Americans. In the eight years before
entering World War I, the United States devoted an average of
0.7% of GDP to defense. Waging war swallowed up an average of
16.1% of GDP--and 116,516 Americans. In the decade before
entering World War II, America devoted an average of 1.1% of
GDP to defense. Waging war devoured an average of 27% of
GDP--and 405,399 Americans. During the Cold War, America
invested an average of 7% of GDP on defense. That didn't end
all wars, but it did deter Moscow from starting World War
III.
Political leadership matters. As the Russian army rumbled
toward Kiev, Zelensky was offered a chance to evacuate. His
defiant response--``I need ammunition, not a ride''--
galvanized Ukraine and rallied the free world. It's no
exaggeration to say that Ukraine remains free because
Zelensky remained in Ukraine. He serves as a reminder of a
truth too many in our postmodern age never learn: Individuals
make a difference, especially in a time of war--from Judah
Maccabee and Abraham Lincoln to Churchill and Zelensky.
America is highly effective at helping those willing to
help themselves. U.S. anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons
helped Ukraine thwart Russia's initial assault. U.S. anti-
missile systems helped Kiev weather Putin's rocket attacks.
U.S. artillery and intelligence helped Ukraine liberate
occupied territory. This effort is very much in America's
wheelhouse. From Britain (World War II) to Israel (1973 and
today) to the mujahideen (1980s) to the Balkans (1990s) to
Iraqi Kurdistan (2010s) to Ukraine, America excels at
assisting people willing to fight for their freedom and
territory. That phrase ``willing to fight'' is key. The
difference between Ukraine's political leadership in 2022
[[Page S4225]]
and Afghanistan's in 2021 is captured in the images of Kabul
and Kiev today. In Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan and South Korea,
America must continue helping those willing to defend their
freedom and territory. U.S. leaders have espoused this idea
for generations: ``Support for freedom-fighters is self-
defense'' and ``tied to our own security,'' President Ronald
Reagan explained.
``It must be the policy of the United States to support
free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed
minorities or by outside pressures,'' President Harry Truman
declared.
``A free man contending for liberty on his own ground is
superior to any slavish mercenary on earth,'' President
George Washington observed.
Resiliency is essential. Russia has targeted Ukraine's
government, cities, food supply, transportation system,
electric grid, internet and communications. Thanks in part to
foreign assistance and in part to a national ethos of
resiliency, Ukraine has withstood the onslaught.
During the Cold War, America grafted resiliency into
national-security strategy. The highway system would serve a
dual purpose in a time of war. Civil-defense programs were at
the ready. Continuity-of government protocols were rehearsed.
Mountain hideaways, ships and planes were on call to serve as
command-and-control nodes. Signaling to Moscow that the
United States was prepared to soldier on--even amid nuclear
attack--reinforced U.S. deterrent strategy. Twenty first-
century equivalents to that sort of resiliency--mechanical-
analog backups for digital systems, critical infrastructure
hardened against EMP attack, vaccines and therapeutics
prepositioned for emergency distribution, updated continuity-
of-government procedures, systems to identify and counter
deepfakes, backup power generation and water purification--
are lacking.
One step in the right direction is the Space Force's Victus
Nox Initiative, which allows the Pentagon to rapidly
reconstitute the U.S. satellite fleet. Another is the
Pentagon's investment in dispersed regional microchip-
manufacturing hubs. Other government agencies--along with
industry--should follow these examples and devote resources
to resiliency.
Unmanned systems are integral to modern warfare. Ukraine
purchased or produced 200,000 drones in 2023--some as big as
planes, some as small as lunchboxes, some made of plastic or
cardboard.
Ukraine's military includes the Achilles Company, which
deploys drone swarms to overwhelm Russian targets. In
addition, there's Aerorozvidka, an organization that builds
killer drones. Ukraine has deployed drones as loitering
airborne artillery, in long-range attacks on Moscow and
longer-range attacks against Russian targets in Sudan, and in
numerous seaborne operations. Indeed, Ukraine has made
history with torpedo-like unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV)
and uncrewed sea vehicles (USV). With a 600-mile range,
Ukraine's UUVs bring most of the Black Sea within reach.
Ukraine's unmanned air force and remote-control missiles
are changing the arithmetic of war. At $250,000, Ukraine's
USVs are a tiny fraction of the cost of the warships, cargo
ships and bridges they have destroyed. By modifying off-the
shelf airborne drones into mortar-dropping systems--at an
estimated cost of $2,000 per unit--Ukraine's military has
eliminated scores of multi-million-dollar Russian tanks and
taken hundreds of Russian troops off the battlefield.
According to Aerorozvidka, every dollar spent on one of its
R18 octocopter drones delivers $670 in Russian losses.
America's military is taking notes. The Pentagon has an
office devoted to countering uncrewed systems. The Pentagon
is testing microdrones that can independently attack targets,
swarm targets and lie in wait for targets. The Pentagon's new
Replicator initiative will field ``attritable autonomous
systems at scale of multiple thousands,'' military officials
report. The Navy just received its first Orca uncrewed mine-
laying submarine.
Creativity is crucial. ``History books will show,'' says
Adm. Rob Bauer, Norway's defense chief, ``Ukraine has
transformed modern warfare.'' Ukraine's creative warriors
have re-engineered Soviet-designed rockets into high-
precision anti-ship missiles (which sank Russia's Black Sea
flagship). They've utilized 3-D printing to produce RPG-like
bombs light enough to air-drop from off-the-shelf drones but
lethal enough to cripple tanks. They've reconfigured Western
missiles to fire from Soviet-era warplanes, turned jet skis
into kamikaze-drones, strapped rockets onto unmanned
speedboats, retrofitted Russian anti-aircraft missiles into
ground-attack rockets and masterfully leveraged digital
technologies.
Ukraine's wireless warriors have hacked into Russian
government agencies and television stations, weaponized video
of Russian war crimes, shaped how the world views the war,
crowdsourced weapons procurement, and used text-messaging and
psyops to encourage Russian surrenders/desertions
(bloodlessly sweeping 17,000 Russians from the battlefield).
Ukraine's tech-savvy troops even developed a smartphone
application that enables soldiers to order an artillery
strike like a civilian would order an Uber.
America must be equally creative--but also capable of
combining the stamina of a superpower with the agility of a
startup: nimble industry-military collaborations to reshape
the battlespace, Army artillery and Marine rockets affixed to
Navy ships, manned-unmanned teaming in the skies and on the
seas, cargo planes refashioned into airborne arsenal-ships,
F-35Bs crammed onto amphibs, U.S. fighter-jets flying off
allied carriers, hot-pit bomber deployments and lily pad
bases, left-of-launch cyberstrikes against missile threats
and allied islands sprinkled with antiship missiles,
reminding Beijing two can play the anti-access/area-denial
game.
Nuclear weapons cast a long shadow across today's
battlefield. Putin's nuclear saberrattling has understandably
given the West pause Recall that Putin promulgated a doctrine
declaring nuclear weapons can be used to--somehow--de-
escalate conflict, and recently deployed nuclear weapons into
Belarus.
Recall that Ukraine surrendered its nuclear arsenal in
exchange for Russia's 1994 commitment to ``refrain from the
threat or use of force'' and respect Ukraine's ``sovereignty
and . . . existing borders.'' The free world's failure to
back up those words after Putin's 2014 lunge into eastern
Ukraine not only set the stage for 2022; it crippled the
cause of nonproliferation. Ukraine serves as an object lesson
of the deterrent power of nuclear weapons--and the danger of
not having them. Allies like South Korea and adversaries like
Iran are pondering that lesson.
Putin's war reminds us state-to-state proliferation isn't
our only nuclear nightmare. During its mutiny, Wagner's army
of warlords came within a whisker of seizing a facility where
Russia stores nuclear weapons.
NATO is the solution, not the problem. Putin and his
apologists say Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 because Ukraine
wanted to join NATO, but they have it precisely backwards:
Ukraine wanted to join NATO because Putin had invaded Ukraine
in 2014. Blaming NATO for this war is akin to blaming me for
offering my neighbor a garden hose to extinguish fires--
rather than the serial-arsonist for starting fires.
Sovereign nations seek NATO membership because they
distrust Moscow and recognize that NATO is the only source of
security in Europe. That distrust has been validated
repeatedly--from the Baltics and Poland during World War II,
to Hungary and Czechoslovakia during the Cold War, to Georgia
and Ukraine today. NATO grows not by conquest but by consent,
not by the force of arms of its members but by the desire for
security of its aspirants.
Russia's rampage through Ukraine reminds us that helping
free nations harden their territory against invasion--as NATO
has done since 1949--is wiser than scrambling to help them
claw it back. As Reagan declared at Normandy, ``It is better
to be here ready to protect the peace, than to take blind
shelter across the sea, rushing to respond only after freedom
is lost.''
Missile defense is essential. With Moscow launching 7,400
missiles and 3,700 kamikazedrones, Kiev has used Soviet-era
S-300s, domestically produced electronic-warfare jammers, and
Western-supplied Patriot, IRIS-T, NASAMS, Hawk and Stinger
systems (the Pentagon calls Ukraine's patchwork air defense
``FrankenSAM'') to intercept thousands of inbound threats,
including 78% of the kamikaze-drones. The lesson: A layered
missile-defense system is not only feasible but essential.
U.S. intelligence still works. Rebounding from its 9/11-era
woes, the intelligence community used a mix of signals
intercepts, satellite imagery and assets inside Russia to
forewarn policymakers about Putin's plans. The Biden
administration released that intelligence to alert Ukraine,
brace Europe and prevent Russian false-flag operations. This
preemptive use of intelligence enabled allies to rush
defensive systems into Ukraine, giving it a chance to thwart
Russia's kill-shot thrust at Kiev.
In the months since, U.S. intelligence has helped Ukraine
eliminate Russian generals, strike munitions depots, degrade
Russian forces in occupied Crimea and develop
counteroffensives. Plus, U.S. Cyber Command--whose commander
serves as director of the NSA, a key piece of the
intelligence community--``bolstered the resilience of
Ukraine'' by conducting ``offensive, defensive, information
operations, Gen. Paul Nakasone cryptically reports.
There's a democratic community committed to defending the
free world. At $46.6 billion in military assistance--and
another $30.3 billion in humanitarian financial assistance--
the United States has sent more aid than any single country.
But America isn't alone. Fifty nations are sending aid to
Ukraine. The European Union (EU) has sent more total aid and
(with Britain) more military aid than the United States. EU
nations planned to deliver a million rounds of 155mm
ammunition between last spring and this spring. South Korea
is sending artillery rounds to Ukraine, howitzers to Estonia,
tanks to Poland. Australia has sent anti-armor weapons and
drones to Ukraine. Israel is sharing missile-warning systems
with Ukraine and missile-defense systems with Germany. Japan
recently approved reforms that will allow it to ship arms to
freeworld allies and partners.
There's an axis of autocrats committed to rolling back the
free world. Russia is trying to erase Ukraine, occupies parts
of Georgia and Moldova, and props up tyrants in Belarus,
Syria, Nicaragua, Cuba, Venezuela and Africa. It spews
military threats against NATO's democracies, is arming
Hezbollah, and has attacked U.S. and British aircraft in
international airspace.
China has absorbed Hong Kong, threatens to seize Taiwan, is
building militarized islands in the South China Sea, boasts
the
[[Page S4226]]
world's largest navy, is tripling its nuclear arsenal and is
conducting a cyber siege of the free world.
Nuclear-armed North Korea is sending ammunition to Moscow
and constantly threatens to attack America, South Korea and
Japan.
Iran supplies Moscow with kamikaze-drones, has unleashed
Hamas and the Houthis, bankrolls Hezbollah, harbors al-
Qaida's leader and is building a nuclear bomb.
The impact of war is never limited to the war zone. Putin's
war has spawned energy-price spikes, refugee flows and food
scarcity around the world. But it exposed his weakness,
triggering a 40% devaluing of the ruble, military mutinies,
fratricides, mass desertions, mass emigration and anti-regime
guerrilla movements. He may not lose his grip on the Kremlin
or Crimea, but by his own measure of the war's objectives he
has lost.
Putin's war has cemented Moscow's position as Beijing's
junior partner, galvanized Ukraine as an independent nation
and reinvigorated NATO.
A planned three-day blitzkrieg that devolved into a
disaster has given Xi pause as he gazes across the Taiwan
Strait. Ukraine's tactics and tenacity have given Taiwan a
roadmap for deterring and, if necessary, repelling an
invasion.
Indeed. Putin's war reminds us that the world is connected.
Just as the defense of West Berlin and South Korea were
linked during the Cold War, the defense of Ukraine and Taiwan
and Israel, the Baltics and the Philippines, the Red Sea and
Black Sea and South China Sea are linked today.
____________________