The Siege of Mariupol

The Siege of Mariupol

Putin figures he can grab more territory and then talk the West down.

From the Wall Street Journal

President Obama took a foreign-policy bow during his State of the Union speech last week, boasting that “we’re upholding the principle that bigger nations can’t bully the small—by opposing Russian aggression, supporting Ukraine’s democracy, and reassuring our NATO allies.” Whereupon Russian-backed forces promptly expanded an offensive in Ukraine that has already claimed more than 5,000 lives.

On Saturday the Ukrainian port of Mariupol, strategically located on the Sea of Azov, came under indiscriminate rocket fire from positions controlled by the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic, the Moscow-sponsored militia in eastern Ukraine. Some 30 people were killed in the attacks; another hundred or so were wounded. Aleksandr Zakharchenko, since November the Donetsk Republic’s “Prime Minister,” had earlier promised an offensive against Mariupol, though both his militia and Moscow were quick to deny responsibility for the massacre.

None of this is surprising, though most military analysts expected the rebels to wait until spring before resuming their onslaught. It also underscores the willful disbelief of Westerners, starting with President Obama, who imagined that the combination of light sanctions on Russia and a steep drop in energy prices would force Vladimir Putin to call an end to his Ukrainian adventure.

The opposite has happened. Russia put its name to a cease-fire signed in Minsk last September. Yet by November Gen. Philip Breedlove, NATO’s Supreme Commander, was reporting the movement of “Russian troops, Russian artillery, Russian air defense systems and Russian combat troops” into Ukraine. More recent sightings of “little green men” in insignia-less uniforms suggest the presence of Russian special forces fighting alongside the rebels.

The Kremlin’s likely aim for this latest offensive is to take Mariupol, which would consolidate rebel control over the Donetsk region and provide a better sea link between Russian-occupied Crimea and the Russian mainland. European leaders have lately been warning that Moscow will face a new round of sanctions should the rebel offensive continue. But given the noises French President François Hollande and others have been making about easing up on sanctions, Mr. Putin probably figures he can take Mariupol first and then bargain the West down.

It also doesn’t hurt Mr. Putin that the Ukrainian war has further boosted his popularity—88% approval, according to one opinion poll late last year—despite the economic turmoil. Russian nationalism runs deep, and dictators tend to benefit politically from splendid little wars, at least those they win.

Which is what makes it all the more imperative for the West to ensure that Russia does not win. The Ukrainian military has ringed Mariupol with a three-tiered defense, but a defeat there would put the defense of the rest of Ukraine into serious question. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has repeatedly asked the U.S. to assist his country with arms, but so far the Obama Administration has done nothing more than to offer limited nonlethal aid. Even Hillary Clinton, in postdove campaign mode, wants the U.S. to do more.

We’re all for sanctioning the Kremlin, especially in ways that directly affect Mr. Putin and his inner circle. But if the West wants to stop the Kremlin’s military offensive, military means are also required. Giving Ukraine the arms to defend its territory is the only chance of stopping Mr. Putin’s siege.