America's Options in Ukraine

Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula poses a distinct challenge to American policymakers. Additionally, a Russian assault on a natural gas terminal just outside of Crimea’s borders and the spreading violence in eastern Ukraine threaten to drag the country into further chaos.

Some on the right have faulted the Administration’s handling of the crisis, claiming Putin’s aggression is the result of a “weak” American foreign policy and calling on the Administration to show “strength.” This simplistic formulation ignores the complex geopolitical situation and the West’s limited options.

What to say:

Putin’s seizure of Crimea violates Ukraine’s sovereignty. Russian forces must leave Ukraine immediately or face serious consequences. Only the Ukrainian people should determine their fate—not outside groups. Partisan gridlock here at home undermines America’s ability to respond decisively.

The criticism that this Administration’s "weakness" somehow invited the crisis or abetted the Russians is misplaced. Here’s why:

Russia aggressively moves against its neighbors no matter who occupies the White House. Since the early 1990s, Russian troops have sliced off pieces of Moldova and Georgia (twice) during the Bush, Clinton, and Bush II administrations.

The White House has already acted on most critics’ proposals.¹

• The President already has sent additional warships to the Black Sea.²
• The U.S. is beefing up its NATO air operations in Ukraine’s neighbors, Poland and Romania.³
• The President already issued an Executive Order⁴ freezing the assets of people and a bank responsible for undermining Ukraine’s territorial integrity. According to a White House official, these sanctions are the “most comprehensive sanctions applied to Russia” since the Cold War.⁵

Moreover, there is already a bill in Congress that provides $1 billion in financial aid to cash-strapped Ukraine, which the White House supports.

Even the President’s toughest domestic critics agree there is not much more he can do—any U.S. military move to assist Ukraine or “punish” Russia could escalate into a Great Power conflict. Without a military option, what remains are mostly economic and symbolic mechanisms to convince Russia to withdraw from Crimea. However, these take time to have an effect—and success is not assured.

• The U.S. can try to expel or suspend Russia from various international organizations, but this will not change Moscow’s strategic rationale for annexing Crimea.
• Attempts to pass a UN resolution condemning Russia's incursions into Ukraine would be purely symbolic since Russia would veto it.
• Sanctions take a long time to have effect and require multinational cooperation to be successful. There is currently little international consensus for broad-based sanctions against Russia.
• Whatever steps the U.S. takes, we risk Russian retaliation on issues we consider important, such as resupplying troops in Afghanistan through the Russian-controlled Northern Distribution Network and solving the Syrian conflict.

Some have argued for broad energy sanctions, claiming the U.S. could offset Russia’s significant energy resources and mitigate the impact on Ukraine and Europe. Unfortunately, the U.S. is not in a position to do so.

• The U.S. currently does not have the natural gas infrastructure in place to export Europe’s lost supply if we all impose sanctions, as approximately 30% of Europe’s natural gas comes from Russia. Even if the U.S. were able to export a significant amount of natural gas (and we won’t be for some time), most of it would go to Asia, where prices are far higher.
• Russia is the world’s second largest oil producer, and removing its product from the market could not only increase global oil prices but also hurt Europe because the continent's infrastructure is built to import Russian oil. The global oil market is further constrained by international sanctions on Iran. Imposing additional oil sanctions could impact our allies' willingness to maintain the sanctions regime against Tehran.

America has few options when dealing with Moscow’s intransigence in Ukraine, and the Administration already is exercising most of them. Scoring cheap political points undermines America’s ability to respond decisively in this crisis and damages its standing in the region and the world.