An expansionist Russia has been the subject of much political commentary since last year, with recent headlines showcasing faulty ceasefires and frenzied retreats.
With just a simple glance, one would think Vladimir Putin has won major victories against the West by challenging the legitimacy of NATO’s defense policy and crossing U.S. set “red lines” without reprimand. Such thoughts would not be irrational, and the fear of threat from Moscow is not off base.
However, there are currently great opportunities and the West should seize them to fill the cracks in its defensive wall and regain some of its lost footing against the Kremlin with effective long and short term policies.
When drafting policies, two things must always be considered: its success in both the immediate and long term. Logically and fiscally, it makes more sense to follow a single long-term strategy, even if it doesn’t achieve the desired results instantaneously, than to abandon one for many other, short-term ones, that work well initially but then fail to accomplish the initial task at hand.
Solely arming Ukraine with heavy weaponry but not educating it on how to use it effectively would be wasteful. If NATO is truly fearful of continued Russian aggression, it needs to abandon any further doctrine of appeasement and train its neighbor to hold the separatists at bay. "Give a man a fish or teach him how to fish?” — this plan does both.
The key to victory in the long term, though, is through sustained economic warfare.
Economic sanctions and the sudden drop in oil prices, oil being the core pillar of the Russian economy, have both dealt substantial blows to an already crumbling market system.
The West must advance its efforts to cut Russia’s GDP without placing the Europeans in an energy crisis, perhaps trading our surplus fracked oil, and expand its maritime presence in the Pacific to counter increased trade with a growing partner, China.
With the worsening state of the Russian economy, Putin faces an economic dilemma and must make the classic choice of how to spend his limited resources: between guns or butter.
Should he choose to continue to flex Russia’s military might, his people will not be supplied with the resources they need to maintain their standard of living and will demand change, forcing Putin to justify his Ukrainian campaign.
He will face domestic consequences should he ignore such a reaction — but should he answer them, he will be forced to cut back on his military expenditures.
Western states face many security threats across the globe, stretching from the Pacific to North Africa. In order for them to truly seize the current opportunity, and free their hands to handle these other security matters, NATO states should make inflicting further damage on the Russian economy and revision of the immediate security policy their priority, instead of ineffective summits and ceasefires.
The Russian bear can be defeated, the West just needs to plan for the future and strike its Achilles’ heel.