Time - International (2019-12-02)

Time December 2–9, 2019

It’s in understanding the gravity of the
harm that Americans can begin to answer the
question, “Why now?” Even if Trump did do
something wrong, why impeach him during
an election year? Why seek to remove him
the very year when voters can render their
own judgment on his candidacy?
The answer is short—because Trump’s
corruption could have had profound strate-
gic consequences—but the explanation is a
bit longer, and it requires the assistance of a
timely report on Russian military capabilities
from the RAND Corporation.
The report is clear. Many Americans are
aware of Russia’s capabilities in cyberwarfare
and disinformation operations, but they’re
largely unaware of advances in its conven-
tional military capabilities. Russia has ac-
complished two things of real importance
in the past decade or so of military modern-
ization. First, it
has substantially
modernized and
professionalized
its force. Second,
it has optimized
it for operations
that are designed
to place NATO,
our most vital in-
ternational alli-
ance, in perhaps
an impossible mili-
tary, strategic and
political bind.
Russia’s military
progress has been on public display in two
vital world regions: the Middle East (where
it has proved remarkably effective at defeat-
ing the Syrian regime’s internal enemies) and,
crucially, in Ukraine. In the RAND report’s
words, when Russian forces invaded Crimea
in 2014, “few were surprised by the annexa-
tion,” but “many were surprised by the per-
formance of the Russian armed forces.”
Indeed, they’ve also “made Western mili-
taries pay increasing attention to the threat
that the Russian military would pose in
any future conflict in Eastern Europe.” The
RAND report assesses that “Russian ground
forces have local dominance along its Euro-
pean and Central Asian borders.” In many
ways, Ukraine is a testing ground for the kind
of fight that could ultimately break NATO.
Brian Nichiporuk, one of the report’s co-
authors, raised the specter of what he called
a “smash and grab” operation—where Rus-
sia launches a rapid invasion of, say, Estonia,

immediately incorporates the invaded nation

into its formidable defense perimeter, and

presents the invasion to the world as a virtual

“fait accompli.”

Would the U.S. commit its forces to a

brutal, bloody battle to liberate its NATO

ally? Or would the likelihood of serious

casualties—combined with the difficulty of

the operation—cause the public to demand

that America abandon Estonia to its fate?

If so, could the NATO alliance survive

intact after Russia demonstrated that the

combination of its might and will could make

a superpower yield?

These sound like esoTeric, theoretical

questions—far removed from the daily lives of

the American public. But these are exactly the

kinds of strategic questions that Presidents

and their advisers should ponder. Here’s one

way to phrase those

interests — an ef-

fective Ukrainian

defense against

Russian aggression

raises the cost of

that aggression and

(crucially) raises

the perceived

cost of future

aggression.

Ukraine needed

lethal military aid,

and Congress ap-

propriated money

to fund that aid.

Now we know that there was a dissenter—

the President of the United States. And he

dissented not because he’d made a careful

(though contentious) assessment of America’s

best strategic interests, but rather because he

was nursing various domestic American po-

litical grudges against the Bidens driven by

unfounded conspiracy theories.

We need Commanders in Chief who are

strategic in their thinking and motivated by

the American national interest.

Trump, by contrast, is ignorant, impulsive,

vulnerable to conspiracy theories, and

motivated by his own personal grievances

and grudges.

Eight months ago, I argued that an elec-

tion, not an impeachment, was the way to

hold President Trump accountable for his

misdeeds. The Ukraine scandal changes the

calculus. It demonstrates that the President

will inject his vices even into the most conse-

quential decisions. •

Armed men believed to be Russian military during the

annexation of Crimea in 2014

TheView Opener

SHORT

READS

▶ Highlights

from stories on

time.com/ideas

Scourge of

superbugs

Former NFL defensive

tackle Brandon Noble

kept playing for years

despite injuries,

including one that

should have ended his

career. “What finally

took me down?”

he writes in a call

for more- powerful

antibiotics. “A tiny

bug I had never heard

of and couldn’t see.”

State of

longing

Though Michael Frank,

author of What Is

Missing, had heard

stories from others

who had struggled with

infertility, he wasn’t

prepared for the agony

he and his wife would

go through. “It’s not

just your body you

hand over to complete

strangers but your

mind too,” he writes.

American

oratory

Abraham Lincoln spoke

of “four score and

seven years ago” in the

Gettysburg Address, a

reference to the date

of the Declaration

of Independence’s

signing. But he

honored ideals much

older than that, writes

Richard Brookhiser,

author of Give Me

Liberty: A History of

America’s Exceptional

Idea. “Americans

began striving for

liberty before the

United States was

a country.”

DA

N (^) K
ITW
OO
D—
GE
TT
Y (^) I
MA
GE
S
16