Strategic Ambiguity and the Risk of War With Russia over Ukraine,

Ralph Clem,senior fellow at the Steven J. Green School of International and Public Affairs at Florida International University and Ray Finch, Eurasian military analyst for the Foreign Military Studies Office (FMSO) at Fort Leavenworth

[…] The alliance has not made clear its strategic goals in the Black Sea region, especially as regards Ukraine. Vague references to “assurance” and “deterrence” and a modicum of in-country training programs and limited supplies of weaponry to Ukraine, if intended to make Moscow rethink its current actions, have clearly failed to affect its behavior. Further geopolitical messaging by NATO forces through deployments and exercises will likely remain ineffective over the long term. Although much of the national security commentary in the United States suggests a further expansion of the allied presence and an even higher operational tempo in the Black Sea region, we see this as a singularly bad idea. How such actions will convince Russia to ratchet down its own military operational messaging is unclear, with recent experience, as documented by our data, suggesting that it will almost certainly do the opposite. We recognize that, in some quarters, any attempt to reach a mutually satisfying agreement with Moscow at the operational level will be labeled as Munich-style “appeasement.” But doing nothing — or, worse, engaging yet more force posture — might lead to large-scale hostilities with truly horrific consequences. Läs artikel