If not Biden, Harris: why the US will have to allow Ukraine to beat Russian roundabout missiles

What may not like Biden's policies, in no way makes their competitors the best option, Trump - Vance - Kennedy have a more one -dimensional position in Ukraine. And it is now destroying for us. How are decisions in the White House? Just like everywhere in developed democratic state systems. Initially, scripts and positions are produced (which are formed by very different people, analytical centers, groups of influence).

These scenarios and positions are then coming to the relevant people responsible for the direction. Then they reach the first persons who interpreted this data, make one or the other decision. Throughout the way, interested parties influence - directly, through the expert environment, through the media. A natural bureaucratic and political process is also added from above. Every change in external circumstances can change the decision.

Therefore, making complex and risky decisions usually happens very carefully, conservatively and for a long time. And everywhere where the desire of very fast decisions begins, because it burns, the path to blurring institutions and dictatorship begins. Most basic decisions in our war - the first sanctions, blocking of airlines from the Russian Federation, program for Ukrainian refugees, first decisions on heavy weapons, Himars - were made extremely quickly for European and American systems.

The more complex and risky decisions, the more lags are, the more different groups of influence they need to be listened to, the higher political and historical responsibility. With Baiden's politics, everything is the same. Joe is not a hawk. And in society in the US, there is no request for participation in the Great War. More precisely, not the case: after Iraq and Afghanistan, the US participation in the wars is very unpopular.

Therefore, with the beginning of a full -scale invasion of Russia into Ukraine, the US administration has solved two tasks: to help Ukraine and to avoid a direct clash between Russia and the US, which can lead to a global disaster. This risk is considered real in the US. And not for nothing Trump and the voter is scared. Therefore, Putin and his gang were so actively exploited by the topics of "red lines". It is not a manipulation of "fears" by Baiden or Sullivana.

It is an impact on social and elitist discourse, which is guided by Biden and Ko. This explains the logic of gradual removal of "red lines". Yes, it is the same "Salami policy" that reduces the risks of nuclear escalation and social dissatisfaction with a minimum. But Ukraine is not in the logic of caution in American and European offices. Therefore, we have a priori different levels of tolerance to escalation from the Russians.

Because we need everything for yesterday, and Putin's nuclear threats are already scared. In the end, the invasion of Russia illustratively demonstrates that Ukraine is ready to ignore the warnings of the US and Europe. And in practice, prove that "red lines" do not work. Because we have no other options. It is the success of the Armed Forces on the battlefield in offensive operations, especially in a limited amount of resources - a key factor that can force the US to view its policies.

Therefore, given the development of events on the front and increasing pressure from European allies, the United States can lift its prohibitions in the current administration. More precisely, not. With all the pressure from the opponents of such a decision among Democrats, hysterics of Trumpists and Russian agents, they will have to do so. Well, or it will have to do Harris if she wins. Somehow so. The author expresses a personal opinion that may not coincide with the editorial position.