Treading Dangerous Ground!
The Perils of Potentially Putting US Advisers on the Ground in Ukraine.
Recent murmurings from Washington DC and National Security Think Tanks suggest an emergent inclination towards deploying US advisers to Ukraine. The aim? To provide a quick end to the ongoing conflict.
While on the surface it might seem a noble endeavor, the proposal itself is dangerously reminiscent of past decisions that led to long-term military entanglements, namely South Vietnam. The lessons from history serve as a glaring reminder of the dangers of even the most well-intentioned foreign interventions.
Echoes of Vietnam
One need only look at the U.S.'s involvement in South Vietnam to comprehend the perilous nature of such decisions. The 35 advisers sent by President Harry Truman, under the guise of supporting France against the Viet Minh insurgency, gradually and inexorably escalated. Over subsequent presidencies, the number of advisers skyrocketed to over half a million active-duty soldiers. This escalation resulted in more than a decade of conflict and the tragic loss of 58,220 American lives. Such is the power of the slippery slope, where seemingly innocuous decisions can lead to unforeseen and disastrous consequences.
From Observers to Fighters
Recent arguments, such as those made by Zachary Griffiths in War on the Rocks, advocate for the placement of US observers in Ukraine to refine US tactics and strategies based on on-ground experiences. Griffiths draws parallels with insights gained post the Yom Kippur War in 1973. However, a crucial distinction remains: there were no American boots on the ground during the Yom Kippur War. Griffiths and other proponents overlook a fundamental reality: observers, especially seasoned ones, often get drawn into the conflict, transitioning from advisers to active fighters. Such a transition not only endangers American lives but also runs the risk of deepening the conflict.
The Fluidity of War
Suggestions that US advisers wouldn't accompany Ukrainian troops into active combat zones or aid in calling airstrikes, as proposed by Chinchilla and Rosenberg, fail to acknowledge the unpredictable and dynamic nature of warfare. Battle lines shift, and what might be perceived as a safe zone one moment can transform into an active combat zone the next. The potential for American casualties is real and imminent.
The True Escalation to Worry About
While many might argue that the introduction of US advisers might cause Russia to intensify its efforts, a more pressing concern should be the response of the Biden administration to any American casualties. Historically, the death of American troops has led to increased military involvement under the premise of protection. With NATO's Article Five in play, there's a looming possibility of a broader military escalation, drawing more nations into the conflict.
A Lesson from History
While some might point to more recent conflicts to gauge the merit of US involvement, it's the Vietnam War that offers the most pertinent cautionary tale. It exemplifies how even minor involvement can snowball into extensive and protracted military engagement. The question remains: Will the powers in Washington heed these lessons from history or are we doomed to repeat them?
In conclusion, the notion of sending advisers to Ukraine, while seemingly benign and well-intentioned, is fraught with peril. The lessons of history ring loud and clear: it's a dangerous path that America would do well to avoid.
I was inspired to write this essay from a piece posted my Liberty Nation.