Turkey’s position is highlighted as a key dissonance in the unity of the Western alliance against the Russian invasion of Ukraine Retired Admiral James Stavridis.

– The goal of Germany has always been to get the maximum support of the Allies for the supply of tanks – and they were good at it. In addition to the British Challenger tanks, they persuaded the US to send 30 mighty Abrams. Dozens, if not hundreds, of Leopards from different European countries will be added to them, and possibly French Leclercs. We are talking about a strong and combat-ready armored group.

“From my point of view here in Washington, the differences don’t seem big. The alliance as a whole is moving essentially as a united front in the direction of increasing the level of military assistance and the combat capability of Ukrainians to fight. Humanitarian aid is flowing smoothly to desperate civilians who are being barbarously bombed by Russia in a series of war crimes. The only obstacle comes from Turkey, which continues to prevent the formal membership of Finland and Sweden in NATO. On the whole, however, the unity and coordination of the Western alliance is striking.

The patience of NATO allies with respect to Turkey has limits. Let’s wait for the elections.

– I agree with General Milli that it will be a difficult task to completely oust Russia from all the occupied territories. This is not impossible, especially if the very poor supply record of the Russian armed forces continues. But especially in the Crimea, the Russians are well fortified and are not going to leave. So our job in the West is to keep giving the Ukrainians what they need to put themselves in the best position when the time comes for the inevitable negotiations, hopefully within this year. In this light, we are now facing a discussion about whether to send modern fighters (MIG-29, F-16) to Ukraine, which they do not currently have.

“I am particularly concerned about Russia’s continued move towards pariah state status. Whether they will be excluded from all aspects of the international system of governance depends on the decisions they make. If – alas – Putin decides to use tactical nuclear weapons, the support he enjoys in part of the international community will evaporate. However, if it negotiates in good faith, Russia has a way back. Let’s hope he makes the right decisions.

“I hope we don’t get to the point where the Alliance is essentially forced to choose between keeping Turkey or joining Sweden and Finland. We have not yet reached this point and must wait for the completion of the electoral process in Turkey next spring. But the patience of the remaining 29 NATO members on this issue has limits, and support for Swedish and Finnish membership is strong. At this stage, the right thing to do would be to let the thermometer drop, see what happens with the elections in Turkey, and then evaluate what our next steps should be. After all, I am sure that Sweden and Finland will join NATO this year.

— I am fully convinced of the continuation of political support for Ukraine on a cross-party basis. While there will be some divisions on the fringes, both right and left, the vast majority of lawmakers understand that this is a once-in-a-generation battle for freedom, democracy, and the rule of law. Allowing Russia to invade and conquer a neighboring country would set a frightening and horrifying precedent that would lead to many other acts of aggression around the world. It is better to stop Russia than to open the door to similar behavior around the world. I’m sure we can do just that.

Wrong Equation

Many countries are trying to equate the Russian invasion of Ukraine with the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. These are completely different cases. The invasion of Afghanistan was a US and NATO response to the September 11 attacks by terrorists based in Afghanistan. The invasion of Iraq was a mistake based on misinformation about the country’s nuclear arsenal. Of course, it’s worth remembering that Saddam Hussein often boasted about the weapons he had at his disposal and clearly hated the US because of its defeat in the first Gulf War after the unwarranted invasion of Kuwait. In the case of Russia, we have an invasion without any prior military provocation out of a desire to conquer a neighboring country rich in natural resources, an invasion identical to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. The West needs to explain these differences more effectively. It should develop the basic logic of defending Ukraine as supporting a democratic state under unfair attack, pointing out that it has no desire to engage in a wider war with Russia, and highlighting Russian atrocities in Ukraine: torture, rape, gratuitous violence. destruction of civilian objects and basic infrastructure.