President Putin made three foundational assumptions in launching his war against Ukraine that should have been correct but were not. First, Putin assumed the invasion of Ukraine would be a quick and easy fight. Second, he assumed the world would denounce the invasion but tacitly allow it. Third, Putin assumed the war would deter NATO expansion.
Understanding how foreign assistance might enable state actors to maintain power in ways that violate the values America espouses in its national policy documents is key to understanding the nature of power in a recipient state. As such, the United States could better tailor such assistance in local contexts that serve the people who need it most while at the same time achieving its strategic objectives.
While the aim of Foreign Military Financing may be to strengthen U.S. geopolitical alliances, it has also caused grated nerves and violent conflict. The alternative—Russian and Chinese arms transfers—is likely worse for the U.S. Ultimately, there is no ideal option, but leveraging aid to improve human rights or protect U.S. objectives is the least the U.S. can do for a world where weapons can fuel resentment and strife.
Amid the fraught U.S.-Russia relations of late, it is vital for American policymakers to consider each geopolitical decision with the utmost care, ensuring the best interests of the United States and her allies are always kept in mind. An appropriate policy would include forgoing any further sale of lethal weaponry, replacing it instead with increased funds and non-lethal aid.
The security challenges America faces in the twenty-first century are so geographically dispersed and so politically complex they can only be solved in partnership with American allies. Reveron believes that over the past two decades U.S. commanders quietly came to recognize this reality and transformed the military from a force of confrontation to one of cooperation.
