Keep in mind that Moscow is 270 miles from the closest part of the border with Ukraine but it is also 350 miles from the border with Latvia (let's not even mention Narva to St. Petersburg). NATO hasn't deployed those kind of weapons to the Baltics for a reason.
https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1473272531142340608
That's because such a move would be considered escalatory and destabilizing in Moscow. So how serious is the threat of the US deploying such systems to Ukraine? IMO, not likely, but I think this might be more about the systems in Poland and Romania. 2/
That's why I think one of the best deterrence measures is to open the door (or possibly even make a public commitment) to deploying land-based long-range missiles and missile defenses in the Baltics (with their agreement) in the event of a Russian escalation in Ukraine. 3/
The problem with sending more arms (e.g. Javelins) to Ukraine as a deterrence measure is 1) they won't significantly alter the outcome 2) they may make a Russian invasion more likely. Sanctions can be useful, but we rely on them too heavily. 4/
A Russian escalation in Ukraine would be an attempt to solve a security issue for Russia (i.e. a hostile neighbor becoming more powerful), so effective deterrence measures should worsen Russia's security situation if they take that COA to alter their cost-benefit analysis. 5/
We should also realize that Javelins and Stingers aren't the best weapons for nations to fight against a capable peer-adversary. We should look at developing better options for proxies, such as loitering munitions, long-range ATGM (SPIKE NLOS), and better air defense systems. 6/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
