
Ukrainians are fighting Russia so US troops don't have to
Recent statements from Moscow make this calculation clear. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov declared in June that the Ukraine war cannot end until NATO 'pulls out' of the Baltic states. This demand represents a dramatic escalation from Russia's previous position, which focused solely on Ukraine's NATO aspirations. Now the Kremlin is demanding the abandonment of NATO allies who have been treaty-protected members since 2004.
This escalation reveals Russia's true strategic objective: not just preventing Ukraine's NATO membership, but rolling back the alliance's existing commitments. The Baltic states — Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania — are full NATO members covered by Article Five, which states that an attack on one member constitutes an attack on all. Unlike Ukraine, any Russian aggression against these nations would legally require direct American military intervention.
The strategic logic is clear: If Russia succeeds in Ukraine and then moves against the Baltics, American soldiers will be legally obligated to fight Russian forces directly. There would be no choice, no debate, no alternative.
Supporting Ukraine today costs money and weapons. Fighting Russia tomorrow under Article Five would cost American lives. The current investment in Ukrainian defense represents perhaps the most cost-effective military expenditure in modern U.S. history.
Critics might argue that Russia's Baltic demands are mere negotiating tactics. But this ignores the pattern of Russian aggression established over the past 16 years: Georgia in 2008, Crimea in 2014 and Ukraine in 2022. Each time, Western leaders assumed Moscow would be satisfied with its gains — each time, they were wrong.
The difference now is that Russia's next logical target, the Baltics, cannot be abandoned without destroying NATO itself. The alliance's credibility rests on the principle that Article Five means something. If NATO retreats from the Baltics under Russian pressure, the alliance becomes meaningless, and America's security guarantees across the globe lose their deterrent effect.
There is now a unique strategic opportunity. Ukraine has demonstrated remarkable resilience and military capability, effectively serving as a force multiplier for U.S. security interests. Ukrainian forces are doing the fighting that American troops might otherwise have to do later, against a Russian military that grows weaker with each passing month.
The choice facing American policymakers is between stopping Russia in Ukraine or potentially fighting them in the Baltics under conditions far less favorable to U.S. security.
Every dollar spent on Ukrainian defense today is an investment in preventing American casualties tomorrow. Every Ukrainian victory weakens Russia's capacity to threaten NATO members. Every month this conflict continues reduces the likelihood that American troops will face Russian forces in direct combat.
The question isn't whether America can afford to support Ukraine. It's whether America can afford not to.
Khusanboy Kotibjonov is a political science student at New York University.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Intercept
27 minutes ago
- The Intercept
Israeli Parliament Votes for Making Apartheid Official. Fetterman: 'I Haven't Been Following It.'
When Israel's parliament voted overwhelmingly in favor of dropping any pretense that it wasn't an apartheid state, some of the Jewish state's most ardent American defenders couldn't even be bothered to pay attention. 'I haven't been following it closely,' said Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who's made defending Israel a key part of his political career. The response was one of a mixed bag among both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill interviewed by The Intercept, but Fetterman's tone was the most strident in its lack of regard. Despite its most powerful ally and arms dealer's stated preference for a two-state solution, Israel's Parliament voted overwhelmingly in favor of a symbolic measure to annex the occupied West Bank on Wednesday. The nonbinding resolution, which was advanced by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition and passed 71-13 in the Knesset, won't legally change the reality in the West Bank — but it marks an escalation in the Israeli government's efforts to annex the territory. Four Democrats in the Senate and House who spoke to The Intercept condemned the Israeli government's vote. Others said they hadn't been following the issue. Fetterman was one of three senators who told The Intercept on Thursday they were unaware of the Knesset vote. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, declined to comment. The resolution in the Knesset, or Parliament, called to apply 'Israeli sovereignty, law, judgment and administration to all the areas of Jewish settlement of all kinds in Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley' — which is how most Israelis refer to the West Bank. Currently, 3 million Palestinians reside in the West Bank, alongside over 500,000 Israeli settlers, who've established settlements in the occupied territory in violation of international law. Annexation of the West Bank would be at odds with the U.S. official policy goal for two states — one for Palestinians in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and one state for Israel comprising its pre-1967 borders. The two-state solution has won official backing from successive presidents dating back to the late 1990s — except for Donald Trump — to assuage concerns over Israel having permanent control over millions of Palestinians without full civil rights. Though the conditions already exist — there is a growing consensus that Israel in an apartheid state — making this control officially permanent would make apartheid indisputable. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have repeatedly undermined the possibility of a two-state solution by arming Israel as it continues to attack Palestinian people and seize their territory, which lawmakers in Congress have made excuses for. As public sentiment turns against Israel, however, with voters increasingly opposing the Netanyahu government's genocide in Gaza, some members of Congress have been more willing to criticize the Israeli regime. Read our complete coverage Though President Joe Biden claimed to be interested in a two-state solution, his administration continued policies such as keeping the U.S. Embassy in occupied Jerusalem, which experts view as undermining the possibility of an independent Palestinian state that includes the West Bank. In his second term, Trump escalated his efforts to thwart the possibility of a sovereign Palestinian state. On Thursday, State Department deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott told reporters during a press briefing that the U.S. would not be attending a United Nations conference on a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. And Trump has repeatedly called for Palestinians in Gaza to be relocated and for the region to be turned into a luxury resort. Fetterman's response to the vote stood in stark contrast to the four other Democratic members of Congress. 'The Knesset's vote to symbolically annex the West Bank is not just reckless — it's a betrayal of the values that have long underpinned America's support for Israel. I've visited the West Bank. I've spoken with people whose lives are shaped by fear and violence,' wrote Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., in a statement. 'A negotiated two‑state solution is the only path to lasting peace and true security for both Israelis and Palestinians. This vote rejects that path.' Sen. Bernie Sanders I-Vt., on the other hand, told The Intercept that now is the time for the U.S. to push back on Netanyahu's government's 'racist, reactionary' policies. 'Israel is now run by right-wing extremists who are in Gaza starving children and shooting people lining up for food, and now in the West Bank, we've seen vigilantism,' said Sanders. 'I think the time is now for the United States government to make clear that we are not going to continue to support these racist, reactionary policies of the Netanyahu government.' Sen. Tim Kaine. D-Va., argued that this would harm peace talks and threaten long-term regional stability. 'It's going to hurt Israel in the long run,' said Kaine. 'You got a peace discussion that's going on right now where Arab nations are saying we want to be peaceful partners with our neighbor, Israel. But this also means that we need to have a future for Palestine as was promised to Palestinians in the U.N. resolution in 1947, and we're not willing to find this regional peace unless you agree to do that.' Kaine argued that the Knesset vote further isolates Israel in the region. 'It looks like the Knesset is just shutting the door in the face of Arab partners who want to try to work together to promote regional stability,' he said. 'There is a credible opportunity for Israel to be less isolated in the neighborhood, but a vote like this makes it harder, not easier.' Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., told The Intercept that the vote speaks to the broader 'endgame' for the Netanyahu administration. 'For Netanyahu and his administration, annexation and control have always been the endgame,' said Ramirez, in a statement. 'We must end the U.S.'s complicity in the Netanyahu Administration's regime of terror. Congress must do its oversight job, demand an end to the blockade and pass Block the Bombs.'


San Francisco Chronicle
27 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
At least 25 people killed by Israeli gunshots and strikes in Gaza, some while seeking aid
DEIR AL-BALAH, Gaza Strip (AP) — At least 25 people were killed by Israeli airstrikes and gunshots overnight, according to health officials and the ambulance service on Saturday, as ceasefire talks appear to have stalled and Palestinians in Gaza face famine. The majority of victims were killed by gunfire as they waited for aid trucks close to the Zikim crossing with Israel, said staff at Shifa hospital, where the bodies were brought. Those killed in strikes include four people in an apartment building in Gaza City among others, hospital staff and the ambulance service said. The strikes come as ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas have hit a standstill after the U.S and Israel recalled their negotiating teams on Thursday, throwing the future of the talks into further uncertainty. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Friday his government was considering 'alternative options' to ceasefire talks with Hamas. His comments came as a Hamas official said negotiations were expected to resume next week and portrayed the recall of the Israeli and American delegations as a pressure tactic. Egypt and Qatar, which are mediating the talks alongside the United States, said the pause was only temporary and that talks would resume, though they did not say when. The United Nations and experts say that Palestinians in Gaza are at risk of famine, with reports of increasing numbers of people dying from causes related to malnutrition. While Israel's army says it's allowing aid into the enclave with no limit on the number of trucks that can enter, the U.N. says it is hampered by Israeli military restrictions on its movements and incidents of criminal looting. The Zikim crossing shootings come days after at least 79 Palestinians were killed trying to reach aid entering through the same crossing. Israel's military said at the time its soldiers shot at a gathering of thousands of Palestinians who posed a threat, and that it was aware of some casualties. Israel is facing increased international pressure to alleviate the catastrophic humanitarian crisis in Gaza. More then two dozen Western-aligned countries and more than 100 charity and human rights groups have called for an end to the war, harshly criticizing Israel's blockade and a new aid delivery model it has rolled out. The charities and rights groups said even their own staff were struggling to get enough food For the first time in months Israel said it is allowing airdrops, requested by Jordan. A Jordanian official said the airdrops will mainly be food and milk formula. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer wrote in a newspaper article on Saturday that the U.K. was 'working urgently' with Jordan to get British aid into Gaza. Aid group the World Central Kitchen said on Friday that it was resuming limited cooking operations in Deir al-Balah after being forced to halt due to a lack of food supplies. It said it's trying to serve 60,000 meals daily through its field kitchen and partner community kitchens, less than half of what it's cooked over the previous month.

Los Angeles Times
27 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump's trip to Scotland as his new golf course opens blurs politics and the family's business
EDINBURGH, Scotland — Lashed by cold winds and overlooking choppy, steel-gray North Sea waters, the breathtaking sand dunes of Scotland's northeastern coast rank among President Trump's favorite spots on Earth. 'At some point, maybe in my very old age, I'll go there and do the most beautiful thing you've ever seen,' Trump said in 2023, during his New York civil fraud trial, talking about his plans for future developments on his property in Balmedie, Aberdeenshire. At 79 and back in the White House, Trump is making at least part of that pledge a reality, landing in Scotland on Friday as his family's business prepares for the Aug. 13 opening of a golf course bearing his name. Trump will be in Scotland until Tuesday, and he plans to talk trade with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The Aberdeen area is already home to another of his courses, Trump International Scotland, and the Republican president is also visiting a Trump course near Turnberry, about 200 miles away on Scotland's southwest coast. Trump said upon arrival Friday evening that his son is 'gonna cut a ribbon' for the new course during his trip. Eric Trump also went with his father to break ground on the project back in 2023. Using a presidential overseas trip — with its sprawling entourage of advisors, White House and support staffers, Secret Service agents and reporters — to help show off Trump-brand golf destinations demonstrates how the president has become increasingly comfortable intermingling his governing pursuits with promoting his family's business interests. The White House has brushed off questions about potential conflicts of interest, arguing that Trump's business success before he entered politics was a key to his appeal to voters. White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers called the Scotland swing a 'working trip.' She added that Trump 'has built the best and most beautiful world-class golf courses anywhere in the world, which is why they continue to be used for prestigious tournaments and by the most elite players in the sport.' Trump went to Scotland to play his Turnberry course during his first term in 2018 while en route to a meeting in Finland with Russian President Vladimir Putin. But this trip comes as the new golf course is already actively selling tee times. 'We're at a point where the Trump administration is so intertwined with the Trump business that he doesn't seem to see much of a difference,' said Jordan Libowitz, vice president for the ethics watchdog organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, known as CREW. 'It's as if the White House were almost an arm of the Trump Organization.' During his first term, the Trump Organization signed an ethics pact barring deals with foreign companies. An ethics framework for Trump's second term allows them. Trump's assets are in a trust run by his children, who are handling day-to-day operations of the Trump Organization while he's in the White House. The company has inked many recent lucrative foreign agreements involving golf courses, including plans to build luxury developments in Qatar and Vietnam, even as the Trump administration negotiates tariff rates for those countries and others. Trump's existing Aberdeenshire course has a history nearly as rocky as the area's cliffs. It has struggled to turn a profit and was found by Scottish conservation authorities to have partially destroyed nearby sand dunes. Trump's company also was ordered to cover the Scottish government's legal costs after the course unsuccessfully sued over the construction of a nearby wind farm, arguing in part that it hurt golfers' views. The development was part of the massive civil case, which accused Trump of inflating his wealth to secure loans and make business deals. Trump's company's initial plans for his first Aberdeen-area course called for a luxury hotel and nearby housing. His company received permission to build 500 houses, but Trump suggested he'd be allowed to build five times as many and borrowed against their values without actually building any homes, the lawsuit alleged. Judge Arthur Engoron found Trump liable last year and ordered his company to pay $355 million in fines — a judgment that has grown with interest to more than $510 million as Trump appeals. Weissert writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Chris Megerian in Washington contributed to this report.