Former state senator believes Ukraine can still end the war, if given right weapons
Former State Sen. Tom Brewer and Don Hutchens, a former head of the Nebraska Corn Board, survey a combine, provided by the Howard Buffett Foundation, that was destroyed by a Russian missile in Rivne, Ukraine. (Courtesy of John Grinvalds)
LINCOLN — After his fifth goodwill and fact-finding trip to war-torn Ukraine, a former Nebraska state legislator and decorated veteran still feels that Ukraine can prevail in its war with Russia if given the right weapons.
And former State Sen. Tom Brewer, who represented north-central Nebraska, said he sees a possible reckoning ahead for President Donald Trump in his dealings with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Putin, he said, has never been truthful in his negotiations over the war, and his latest flirtations with peace talks may turn out to just be a delaying tactic to allow Russian forces to get organized for a summer offensive.
'There's a huge game of chess that's being played right now,' Brewer said in a recent interview. 'I think the next month will bring to light that Putin is not serious about negotiations, he's just buying time.'
'If you look at history, the Russians have never been honest about any of the negotiating they've done,' he added. 'Why would they start now?'
Brewer, now 66, is at an age when most veterans are working on their golf game or heading out on a fishing trip. He's had more than 70 surgeries to repair war wounds and a bad back. The trip by plane, train, bus and eventually Toyota 4Runners in the dark of night is long and grueling, over roads pock-marked by missile strikes.
But he keeps going back to Ukraine in part because he admires their freedom-loving spirit and in part because he feels his military experience — six tours of duty in Afghanistan and experience with artillery and helicopters — could help their war effort.
Eventually, he believes he could also help the reconstruction of a country known as the 'bread basket of Europe.'
On this latest trip he was accompanied by Don Hutchens, a retired head of the Nebraska Corn Board and a veteran of foreign trade missions. They set up a video meeting with University of Nebraska President Jeffrey Gold and Ukraine's ministers of agriculture and intelligence to lay the groundwork for possible collaboration in rebuilding Ukraine's crop production.
Ukraine has lost more than 20% of its farmland since the Russians invaded, according to Alliance Magazine, and an estimated 139,000 square kilometers of land — almost twice the size of Nebraska — are suspected to hold land mines.
Brewer said that in areas where the Russians had occupied, anything of value was taken and farm machinery not taken was disabled. Farmers are left using old equipment in hopes of growing a crop, he said.
During his trip, Brewer visited associates of Howard Buffett, the son of Omaha billionaire Warren Buffett, who is on track to pass a total of $1 billion in private aid this year given to Ukraine to remove mines and provide new combines, planters and tractors.
'(Buffett) has a really good team over there that is well-organized,' he said. 'He's probably more highly thought of than anyone else in the country. If he wanted to run for president he could beat out (Ukraine President Volodymyr) Zelinskyy.'
Brewer also visited an orphanage under construction near Kyiv that has been supported by Ukrainian-Americans as well as a hospital where wounded soldiers are fitted for prosthetic limbs. An estimated 52,000 Ukrainians have lost parts of arms and legs in the war, he said, which has left possibly 18,000 children orphaned.
Some U.S. military aid is still reaching troops in Ukraine, he said, but the elimination of the USAID agency has meant an end of food shipments to those living in a 'no-man's land' near the front. Despite the pull back of some American aid, the Ukrainians provided a warm welcome back, Brewer said.
As after past trips, the former legislator will provide a trip report to the Nebraska delegation in Congress in hopes that makes a difference.
On this trip, Brewer watched young Ukrainian soldiers, fueled by Red Bull and vape pens, guiding attack drones and was impressed by the capability of an artillery team unit that got only three week's training on guns the U.S. Army provides months of training to operate.
He said that if he was 'king for a day,' the U.S. would provide more long-range missiles so that Russian forces could be moved farther away from the Ukrainian border to deter drone attacks and dropping of unguided 'glide bombs.' Tougher sanctions, Brewer added, could help squeeze the Russian economy to the point that they would give up.
The former senator said he is sometimes 'astounded' about how long it took the U.S. to provide the weaponry that is needed.
The sounds of drones buzzing overhead is a constant near the front, Brewer said, and the glide bombs, which cannot be detected by anti-missile batteries, have exacted a horrible toll.
He said that this war could completely reshape Europe and the future of democracy, and it's important to stop Putin now, or else he will be emboldened to invade more countries. Brewer said he 'hates' the idea that Ukraine would have to give up valuable territory to end the war.
'The only way to defeat (the Russians) is to defeat them on the battlefield,' he said, 'and the only way to do that is give (Ukraine) the right weapons to do it.'
'Even though they've been through three years of war, and even though they've lost an estimated 100,000 civilian and military lives, their spirit is still passionate about staying free,' Brewer said.
'You're not going to see the Ukrainian people say, 'We've had enough.' I think they'll fight until they have nothing left to fight with.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Russian missile and drone attacks across Ukraine kill 4, injure around 50
KYIV, Ukraine — Russia bombarded six regions of Ukraine in one of its largest aerial attacks of the three-year war, Ukrainian officials said Friday. The nighttime assault lasted for hours and killed three emergency responders in the capital Kyiv as well as another person in a northwestern city, according to authorities. The barrage included 407 drones and 44 ballistic and cruise missiles, Ukrainian air force spokesperson Yurii Ihnat said. Ukrainian forces said they shot down about 30 of the cruise missiles and up to 200 of the drones. Some 50 Ukrainian civilians were injured across the country, emergency services said. The latest Russian attack came hours after U.S. President Donald Trump said it might be better to let Ukraine and Russia 'fight for a while' before pulling them apart and pursuing peace. Trump's comments were a remarkable detour from his often-stated appeals to stop the war and signaled he may be giving up on recent peace efforts. Ukrainian cities have come under regular bombardment since Russia invaded its neighbor in February 2022. The attacks have killed more than 12,000 civilians, according to the United Nations. 'Russia doesn`t change its stripes,' Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said. Zelensky, as well as the Ukrainian Interior Ministry and the general prosecutor's office, said three emergency workers were killed in Kyiv while responding to the Russian strikes. 'They were working under fire to help people,' the Interior Ministry said in a statement. The war has continued unabated even as a U.S.-led diplomatic push for a settlement has brought two rounds of direct peace talks between delegations from Russia and Ukraine. The negotiations delivered no significant breakthroughs, however, and the sides remain far apart on their terms for an end to the fighting. Ukraine has offered an unconditional 30-day ceasefire and a meeting between Zelensky and Russian leader Vladimir Putin to break the deadlock. But the Kremlin has effectively rejected a truce and hasn't budged from its demands. 'The Kremlin continues efforts to falsely portray Russia as willing to engage in good-faith negotiations to end the war in Ukraine, despite Russia's repeated refusal to offer any concessions,' the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, said late Thursday. Putin said in a phone call with Trump earlier this week that he would respond to Ukraine's daring long-range attack on Russian air bases on Sunday. Russia's Defense Ministry claimed it had aimed at Ukrainian military targets with 'long-range precision weapons' and successfully struck arms depots, drone factories and repair facilities, among other targets. Putin, who denounced the Ukrainian government as 'terrorist' after the weekend attacks on Russian air bases and railway bombings that Moscow blamed on Ukraine, promised a response to the air base assault. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Friday that 'all that is being done by our military daily is a response to the actions by' Ukraine. Friday's barrage fits into a pattern of Russian attacks throughout the war. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said the attacks demonstrated key differences between Russia and Ukraine. 'The difference … is that Ukraine hits legitimate military targets—such as aircraft equipped to bomb our children. Russia targets residential areas, civilians, and critical infrastructure,' Sybiha wrote on X. 'Putting Ukraine and Russia on equal footing is unacceptable.' In Russia, air defenses shot down 10 Ukrainian drones heading toward the capital early Friday, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin said. Flights at Moscow airports were temporarily suspended during the night as a precaution. Ukrainian drones also targeted three other regions of Russia, authorities said, damaging apartment buildings and industrial plants. Three people were injured, officials said. Russia's Defense Ministry said that air defenses downed 174 Ukrainian drones over 13 regions early Friday. It added that three Ukrainian Neptune missiles were also shot down over the Black Sea. Ukraine struck airfields and other military targets in Russia, such as fuel storage tanks and transport hubs, the Ukrainian General Staff said. Also, a locomotive derailed early Friday in the Belgorod region after the track was blown up, Belgorod Gov. Vyacheslav Gladkov said. Russia has recently accused Ukraine of sabotaging the rail network. In Kyiv, multiple explosions were heard for hours as falling drone debris sparked fires across several districts, said Tymur Tkachenko, head of the Kyiv City Administration. He urged people to seek shelter. Fourteen-year-old Kyiv resident Vitalina Vasylchenko sheltered in a parking garage with her 6-year-old sister and their mother after an explosion blew one of their windows off its hinges. 'I heard a buzzing sound, then my dad ran to me and covered me with his hand, then there was a very loud explosion,' she said. 'My whole life flashed before my eyes, I already thought that was it. I started having a panic attack ... I'm shocked that I'm alive.' Ukraine's human rights chief, Dmytro Lubinets, called for a strong international response to Russia's latest overnight attack, saying the assault violated basic human rights. 'Russia is acting like a terrorist, systematically targeting civilian infrastructure,' Lubinets wrote on Telegram. 'The world must respond clearly and take concrete steps, including condemning the aggressor's actions.' Authorities reported damage in several districts in Kyiv, and rescue workers responded to damage and fires at multiple locations. In Solomyanskyi district, a fire broke out on the 11th floor of a 16-story residential building. Emergency services evacuated three people from the apartment. The attack caused a blackout in some areas, and more than 2,000 households on Kyiv's eastern bank were without power, the Kyiv City Administration said. Elsewhere, 10 people were injured by an aerial attack on the western city of Ternopil, regional governor Viacheslav Nehoda said. The strike damaged industrial and infrastructure facilities, left parts of the city without electricity, and disrupted water supplies. Three people were also injured in Ukraine's central Poltava region. Russia also targeted the western Lviv and Khmelnytskyi regions, and the northern Chernihiv region. Arhirova and Stepanenko write for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Golden Dome dangers: An arms control expert explains how Trump's missile defense threatens to make the US less safe
President Donald Trump's idea of a 'Golden Dome' missile defense system carries a range of potential strategic dangers for the United States. Golden Dome is meant to protect the U.S. from ballistic, cruise and hypersonic missiles, and missiles launched from space. Trump has called for the missile defense to be fully operational before the end of his term in three years. Trump's goals for Golden Dome are likely beyond reach. A wide range of studies makes clear that even defenses far more limited than what Trump envisions would be far more expensive and less effective than Trump expects, especially against enemy missiles equipped with modern countermeasures. Countermeasures include multiple warheads per missile, decoy warheads and warheads that can maneuver or are difficult to track, among others. Regardless of Golden Dome's feasibility, there is a long history of scholarship about strategic missile defenses, and the weight of evidence points to the defenses making their host country less safe from nuclear attack. I'm a national security and foreign policy professor at Harvard University, where I lead 'Managing the Atom,' the university's main research group on nuclear weapons and nuclear energy policies. For decades, I've been participating in dialogues with Russian and Chinese nuclear experts – and their fears about U.S. missile defenses have been a consistent theme throughout. Russian President Vladmir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping have already warned that Golden Dome is destabilizing. Along with U.S. offensive capabilities, Golden Dome poses a threat of 'directly undermining global strategic stability, spurring an arms race and increasing conflict potential both among nuclear-weapon states and in the international arena as a whole,' a joint statement from China and Russia said. While that is a propaganda statement, it reflects real concerns broadly held in both countries. Experience going back half a century makes clear that if the administration pursues Golden Dome, it is likely to provoke even larger arms buildups, derail already-dim prospects for any negotiated nuclear arms restraint, and perhaps even increase the chances of nuclear war. My first book, 35 years ago, made the case that it would be in the U.S. national security interest to remain within the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which strictly limited U.S. and Soviet – and later Russian – missile defenses. The United States and the Soviet Union negotiated the ABM Treaty as part of SALT I, the first agreements limiting the nuclear arms race. It was approved in the Senate 98-2. The ABM Treaty experience is instructive for the implications of Golden Dome today. Why did the two countries agree to limit defenses? First and foremost, because they understood that unless each side's defenses were limited, they would not be able to stop an offensive nuclear arms race. If each side wants to maintain the ability to retaliate if the other attacks – 'don't nuke me, or I'll nuke you' – then an obvious answer to one side building up more defenses is for the other to build up more nuclear warheads. For example, in the 1960s and 1970s, the Soviets installed 100 interceptors to defend Moscow – so the United States targeted still more warheads on Moscow to overwhelm the defense. Had it ever come to a nuclear war, Moscow would have been even more thoroughly obliterated than if there had been no defense at all. Both sides came to realize that unlimited missile defenses would just mean more offense on both sides, leaving both less secure than before. In addition, nations viewed an adversary's shield as going hand in hand with a nuclear sword. A nuclear first strike might destroy a major part of a country's nuclear forces. Missile defenses would inevitably be more effective against the reduced, disorganized retaliation that they knew would be coming than they would be against a massive, well-planned surprise attack. That potential advantage to whoever struck first could make nuclear crises even more dangerous. Unfortunately, President George W. Bush pulled the United States out of the ABM Treaty in 2002, seeking to free U.S. development of defenses against potential missile attacks from small states such as North Korea. But even now, decades later, the U.S. has fewer missile interceptors deployed (44) than the treaty permitted (100). The U.S. pullout did not lead to an immediate arms buildup or the end of nuclear arms control. But Putin has complained bitterly about U.S. missile defenses and the U.S. refusal to accept any limitation at all on them. He views the U.S. stance as an effort to achieve military superiority by negating Russia's nuclear deterrent. Russia is investing heavily in new types of strategic nuclear weapons intended to avoid U.S. missile defenses, from an intercontinental nuclear torpedo to a missile that can go around the world and attack from the south, while U.S. defenses are mainly pointed north toward Russia. Similarly, much of China's nuclear buildup appears to be driven by wanting a reliable nuclear deterrent in the face of the United States' capability to strike its nuclear forces and use missile defenses to mop up the remainder. Indeed, China was so angered by South Korea's deployment of U.S.-provided regional defenses – which they saw as aiding the U.S. ability to intercept their missiles – that they imposed stiff sanctions on South Korea. Now, Trump wants to go much further, with a defense 'forever ending the missile threat to the American homeland,' with a success rate 'very close to 100%.' I believe that this effort is highly likely to lead to still larger nuclear buildups in Russia and China. The Putin-Xi joint statement pledges to 'counter' defenses 'aimed at achieving military superiority.' Given the ease of developing countermeasures that are extraordinarily difficult for defenses to overcome, odds are the resulting offense-defense competition will leave the United States worse off than before – and a good bit poorer. Putin and Xi made clear that they are particularly concerned about the thousands of space-based interceptors Trump envisions. These interceptors are designed to hit missiles while their rockets are still burning during launch. Most countries are likely to oppose the idea of deploying huge numbers of weapons in space – and these interceptors would be both expensive and vulnerable. China and Russia could focus on further developing anti-satellite weapons to blow a hole in the defense, increasing the risk of space war. Already, there is a real danger that the whole effort of negotiated limits to temper nuclear arms racing may be coming to an end. The last remaining treaty limiting U.S. and Russian nuclear forces, the New START Treaty, expires in February 2026. China's rapid nuclear buildup is making many defense officials and experts in Washington call for a U.S. buildup in response. Intense hostility all around means that for now, neither Russia nor China is even willing to sit down to discuss nuclear restraints, in treaty form or otherwise. In my view, adding Golden Dome to this combustible mix would likely end any prospect of avoiding a future of unrestrained and unpredictable nuclear arms competition. But paths away from these dangers are available. It would be quite plausible to design defenses that would provide some protection against attacks from a handful of missiles from North Korea or others that would not seriously threaten Russian or Chinese deterrent forces – and design restraints that would allow all parties to plan their offensive forces knowing what missile defenses they would be facing in the years to come. I believe that Trump should temper his Golden Dome ambitions to achieve his other dream – of negotiating a deal to reduce nuclear dangers. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Matthew Bunn, Harvard Kennedy School Read more: Golden Dome: An aerospace engineer explains the proposed US-wide missile defense system Is Russia looking to put nukes in space? Doing so would undermine global stability and ignite an anti-satellite arms race H-bomb creator Richard Garwin was a giant in science, technology and policy Matthew Bunn is a member of the National Academies Committee on International Security and Arms Control and a board member of the Arms Control Association. He is a member of the Academic Alliance of the United States Strategic Command and a consultant to Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Kremlin angered by Trump's 'fighting children' comparison
The Kremlin has reacted angrily to a comparison made by US President Donald Trump, who likened the war in Ukraine to a bitter dispute between toddlers. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in Moscow on Friday that it was possible Trump believed this. "But for us, this is an existential question, a question of our national interests, a question of our security, the future of our children, the future of our country," Peskov said, according to the Russian state news agency TASS. The spokesman did not comment on Russia's role as the aggressor in the war. Russia is fighting because the West has rejected all of Moscow's proposals for a solution to the conflict, Peskov claimed. During his meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House, Trump accused both sides in the war of being determined to continue fighting. "Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy, they hate each other and they're fighting in a park," he said. "And you try and pull them apart, they don't want to be pulled. Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart." Ukraine has been defending itself against a Russian invasion for more than three years.
