President Biden’s mismanagement could inadvertently bungle the Ukrainian crisis into nuclear World War III.

Ukraine is not a member of NATO.  So the U.S. has no obligation to defend Ukraine from impending invasion by Russia. 

Nonetheless, President Biden is airlifting anti-tank missiles, ammunition, and other lethal military aid to Ukraine on an emergency basis. 

President Biden has also approved suspending prohibition on NATO members from exporting U.S. supplied military equipment to other countries.  Now Britain, Poland, the Baltic states and other NATO members are rushing military aid to Ukraine.

NATO arms flowing into Ukraine to beef-up their military is supposed to deter a Russian invasion, or so President Biden hopes.  But surging Western military aid to Ukraine could have just the opposite effect, provoking Russian invasion. 

Moscow may misinterpret military aid to Ukraine as confirming their fears the West intends to promote Ukraine from the Partnership for Peace (an interim step toward NATO membership) to full NATO membership. 

The Kremlin has often declared it will oppose Ukrainian admittance to NATO using all means necessary—including nuclear weapons. 

Ukraine is a vital strategic interest to Russia for a host of reasons, not least because Ukraine is a buffer providing strategic depth between Moscow and NATO.  If Ukraine enters NATO, the U.S.-led alliance will be only 300 miles from Moscow, easy striking distance for a surprise attack by missiles, aircraft, and tank armies.

Russia has been a bloody battleground for centuries, invaded from the West by the Swedish Empire’s Gustavus Adolphus, France’s Napoleon, the Kaiser’s Germany in World War I, and Hitler’s Nazi Germany in World War II, the last costing Russia 20-30 million dead.  Now the “bloodlands” of eastern and central Europe, conquered and controlled by Russia until 1989, are joining or want to join NATO, including Ukraine.

Of course, Russia has been an aggressor at least as often as it has been a victim.  The Russian Empire and the Soviet Union are both red with the blood of conquered nations and oppression of their own peoples.  

Consequently, Moscow’s worldview is one of endless paranoia.  Threats are everywhere.   

Ukraine is of no vital strategic interest to the West.  The U.S. and its NATO allies have no intention of invading Russia.

But the West’s idealistic defense of Ukraine’s sovereignty is misinterpreted by a suspicious Kremlin that NATO expansion eastward will include Ukraine, and other former Soviet territories belonging to NATO’s Partnership for Peace, as part of a Western plot to destroy Russia. Russia may calculate it must invade Ukraine now, before Western military aid strengthens Ukraine, raising the cost of invasion. 

Biden administration policies make Ukraine a potential powder keg that could ignite a nuclear World War III:

--If NATO military aid to Ukraine succeeds in raising too high the costs to Russia of invasion by conventional forces, then Russia may resort to using tactical nuclear weapons.

--NATO military aid to Ukraine cannot succeed in defeating Russia, but may strengthen Ukrainian forces enough so they avoid quick defeat, and make a fighting retreat into Poland, Romania and/or other neighboring NATO states.  If Russia follows, it will be an invasion of NATO that can only be defeated by U.S. employment of tactical nuclear weapons.

--Biden administration strategy is to turn Ukraine into another Afghanistan for Russian forces, by feeding military aid into Ukraine from neighboring NATO states.  Knowing this, Russia may defeat this strategy by isolating Ukraine from neighboring NATO states by invading them too.  Pentagon calculations indicate Russia can defeat Ukraine and neighboring NATO states in days, unless NATO resorts to tactical nuclear weapons.

--If Russia plans to invade Ukraine and neighboring NATO states, knowing this could provoke NATO’s use of tactical nuclear weapons, Russia may make a preemptive nuclear strike on European NATO bunkers where tactical nuclear weapons are stored. 

--A Russian preemptive strike on European NATO tactical nuclear weapons would result in confrontation with U.S. strategic nuclear forces and a possible homeland-to-homeland exchange.  Knowing this, Russia may make a disarming preemptive strike against all tactical and strategic nuclear forces in the U.S. and European NATO.

--Since Russia and China are allies, and have for years practiced conventional and nuclear forces exercises together, if Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing may simultaneously annex Taiwan and the South China Sea.  The two dictatorships could coordinate and expand their aggression to achieve a “final solution” to all issues between East and West. 

--Russia and China hope to avoid nuclear apocalypse, using EMP and Cyber Warfare to blackout adversary electric grids and paralyze adversary military forces.  The allure of swift, relatively bloodless, victory through electronic warfare makes aggression more likely.

President Biden should heed former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s recent warning that the U.S. needs “a multibillion-dollar program to build national EMP preparedness, to harden our electric grid, which will protect our military assets, infrastructure, businesses, and people.” 

War can be avoided if President Biden promises NATO will not expand further eastward, which is sensible.  Americans should not die for Ukraine or Kazakhstan.

Dr. Peter Vincent Pry is Executive Director of the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security, served as Chief of Staff of the Congressional EMP Commission, Director of the U.S. Nuclear Strategy Forum, and on the staffs of the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA.

Emailed to us February 6, 2022 from Dr. Pry

HR 4521 will spend $75 million annually 2022-2026, $300 million, maybe enough  to buy only 30 EHV transformers.  The EMP Commission considered an EHV transformer reserve, but this is far less sensible than hardening the transformers to survive in the first place.  The bill does provide for designing EMP protection into transformers and other equipment, and for making transformers in America--which will be money well spent.  This is no "EMP Manhattan Project" and it may well be too little too late.  But at least the Biden Administration and Democrat Congress are trying to do something.  It is heartening to see that even a "woke" administration is trying to advance national EMP preparedness, thanks to you and all our fellow EMP Warriors.          

Within the 2,912 pages of H.R. 4521, THE AMERICA COMPETES ACT OF 2022  see Sec. 20301  Strategic Transformer Reserve and Resilience Program, pages 785-788.

 

H.R. 4521 THE AMERICA COMPETES ACT OF 2022

 

TITLE III—ENERGY

13 SEC. 20301. STRATEGIC TRANSFORMER RESERVE AND RE

14 SILIENCE PROGRAM.

15 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish

16 a program to reduce the vulnerability of the electric grid

17 to physical attack, cyber attack, electromagnetic pulse,

18 geomagnetic disturbances, severe weather, climate change,

19 and seismic events, including by—

20 (1) ensuring that large power transformers,

21 generator step-up transformers, power conversion

22 equipment, and other critical electric grid equipment

23 are strategically located to ensure timely replace ment of such equipment as may be necessary to restore electric grid function rapidly in the event of severe damage to the electric grid due to physical attack, cyber attack, electromagnetic pulse, geomagnetic disturbances, severe weather, climate

4 change, or seismic events; and

5 (2) establishing a coordinated plan to facilitate

6 transportation of large power transformers, generator step-up transformers, power conversion equipment, and other critical electric grid equipment.

9 (b) TRANSFORMER RESILIENCE.—In carrying out

10 the program established under subsection (a), the Secretary shall—

12 (1) improve large power transformers, generator step-up transformers, power conversion equipment, and other critical electric grid equipment by reducing their vulnerabilities;

16 (2) develop, test, and deploy innovative equipment designs that are more flexible and offer greater  resiliency of electric grid functions;

19 (3) coordinate with industry to standardize

20 large power transformers, generator step-up transformers, power conversion equipment, and other critical electric grid equipment;

23 (4) monitor and test large power transformers, generator step-up transformers, power conversion equipment, and other critical electric grid equipment that the Secretary determines may pose a risk to the bulk-power system or national security; and

3 (5) facilitate the domestic manufacturing of large power transformers, generator step-up transformers, power conversion equipment, and other critical electric grid equipment through the issuance of grants and loans, and through the provision of technical support.

9 (c) STRATEGIC EQUIPMENT RESERVES.—

10 (1) AUTHORIZATION.—In carrying out the program established under subsection (a), the Secretary may establish one or more federally owned strategic  equipment reserves, as appropriate, to ensure nationwide access to large power transformers, generator step-up transformers, power conversion equipment, and other critical electric grid equipment.

17 (2) CONSIDERATION.—In establishing any federally owned strategic equipment reserve, the Secretary may consider existing spare transformer and equipment programs and requirements established by the private sector, Regional Transmission Organizations, Independent System Operators, and State regulatory authorities.

24 (d) CONSULTATION.—The program established under subsection (a) shall be carried out in consultation with the HER\APPDATA\ROAMING\SOFTQUAD\XMETAL\11.0\GEN\C\RC

1 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Electricity

2 Subsector Coordinating Council, the Electric Reliability

3 Organization, and owners and operators of critical electric

4 infrastructure and defense and military installations.

5 (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $75,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2022 through 2026.

8 (f) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:

9 (1) BULK-POWER SYSTEM; ELECTRIC RELI10

ABILITY ORGANIZATION.—The terms ‘‘bulk-power system’’ and ‘‘Electric Reliability Organization’’ have the meaning given such terms in section 215 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824o)).

14 (2) CRITICAL ELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE.—

15 The term ‘‘critical electric infrastructure’’ has the meaning given such term in section 215A of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824o–1).

18 (3) INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR; REGIONAL TRANSMISSION ORGANIZATION STATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY.—The terms ‘‘Regional Transmission Organization’’, ‘‘Independent System Operator’’, and ‘‘State regulatory authority’’ have the meaning given such terms in section 3 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796).

1 (4) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of Energy.

January 25, 2022 (4:47 p.m.)

G:\CMTE\RU\17\RCP\RCP_4521.XML

g:\VHLD\012522\D012522.050.xml (829934|4)