Source: United States Senator for Nebraska Deb Fischer
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) today participated in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the status of the ongoing war in Ukraine.
Sen. Fischer asked each witness on the panel to give their assessment on the current state of the conflict. Sen. Fischer also highlighted the importance of NATO allies, as well as President Biden and Members of Congress, continuing to step up and support Ukraine against Putin’s invasion.
Witnesses:
Dr. Angela Stent – Director Emerita, Georgetown University Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies
Ms. Dara Massicot – Senior Policy Researcher, RAND Corporation
LTG Keith Kellogg – Co-Chair, Center for American Security America First Policy Institute
Click the image above to watch video of Sen. Fischer’s remarks
Following is a transcript of Senator Fischer’s questioning:
Sen. Fischer: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our panelists that are here today. I’d like to begin by asking you to share your assessments on the current status of war in Ukraine. So— hopefully I’m going to be like Senator Tuberville, and we’ll do ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ unless you feel a driving desire that you have to explain further. We’ll start with you, Doctor. How would you assess the current state of the Russian military in Ukraine?
Dr. Stent: Well, they’re struggling to perform better. On the other hand, they do have, you know, a few hundred thousand more people that they can throw into this war. And they’ve learned a little bit from their mistakes. But still, they’re struggling.
Sen. Fischer: Thank you. Ms. Massicot?
Ms. Massicot: I don’t think they’ve culminated in the Clausewitzian sense, but their combat effectiveness is definitely degraded. They’re trying to find the solution and I think that they’re trying to use brute force tactics to close on the Ukrainians as quickly as possible at a very high cost. I don’t think they’re capable of large incursions anymore, not for several years until they can properly regenerate armored force and rebuild their missile stocks. That being said, I do anticipate incremental gains in Donetsk and Luhansk, potentially a little bit more in Zaporizhzhia. I don’t have a timeline on that, but probably towards the summer, that’s what their intentions are.
Sen. Fischer: When you talk about the Russians using brute force and brutal tactics – will the Ukrainians suffer through that and remain strong?
Ms. Massicot: Their will to fight is very strong, but this is taking a toll on them. It is not only a high casualty situation for them as well. There’s also a lot of psychological distress, because again, we’re talking about mowing down human beings every day. Also, they have specific needs that are emerging from this type of fighting. And we’re talking about ammunition, small arms, 50-caliber, mortars, artillery shells to counter this. So, you know, I know we talk a lot about ATACMS and F-16s …
Sen. Fischer: Thank you. And, General?
LTG Keith Kellogg: Senator, thank you. I think you’re heading into a war of attrition like we’re seeing around Bakhmut right now. The longer this war goes, it accrues to Russia’s favor. That’s the reason it must be terminated as quickly as it can while Ukraine still has the advantage. Russia will have the advantage. Russia is learning right now, as we’re seeing around Bakhmut, where they’re changing how they fight, the tactics they are using by sheer mass and heavy use of artillery. They’re going back to the way the Russians used to fight before.
Sen. Fischer: General, how important is it that the United States and our allies continue to be supportive to Ukraine for their psychological reasons and to show the Russians that we will be supportive to the Ukrainians? How does that play into your previous analysis that you just stated?
LTG Keith Kellogg: Well, I think the Ukrainians can do more. If you look what the Kiel Institute just said — and that’s out of Kiel, Germany — the European Union has only committed 6% of their total stores of military stock, where the British have committed 25% of their total stock. And we’re committing a lot of our stock as well. So I think that when it comes down to — referring back to what Senator Kaine said a minute ago — there isn’t a question about presidential leadership, not what this Congress has done, which has been enormous. But where you lead is from the top and where those decisions are made through the top is getting the other allies to contribute more. They’re not contributing what they can contribute to this fight.
Sen. Fischer: Ms. Massicot, how would you analyze that? How important is it for Congress, for our administration to be vocal about our support and our continued support, and also for our allies, for NATO to step up? How does that play, not just on the Ukrainians, but on the Russians as well?
Ms. Massicot: So I was in the Pentagon in 2014, the first time Russia invaded. And I could say that the response from this government is fundamentally very different. Our intel collection prior to the war, it was very different. Our response is very different. I do think the Russians are deterred from the upper end of their escalation. I think they remain absolutely terrified of our airpower. They don’t engage us in cyber attacks—
Sen. Fischer: Are we too slow in getting to Ukraine what they need?
Ms. Massicot: I don’t have all the information, but it’s my assumption that logistics to get these weapons dug out of every corner from different parts of the globe is complicated, logistically. From what I understand from the outside, I don’t think it’s a deliberate metering of things not to give it to them. I think there’s a lot that’s complicated in getting to them. I don’t know how to improve the logistics.
Sen. Fischer: But to show our resolve in getting it there is important?
Ms. Massicot: I do.
Sen. Fischer: Thank you. Dr. Stent, how would you respond?
Dr. Stent: You know, it seems to me that we’ve been doing this incrementally. And we first of all, say we’re not going to send the system—
Sen. Fischer: Then we do.
Dr. Stent: And then we do send it. And so in the end, we do the right thing. But probably some of these things could have been sent more quickly. And I think obviously, what we’re all awaiting now is what the outcome of this question about whether we’re going to supply them with fighter jets, the F-16, will be.
Sen. Fischer: The airpower earlier would have prevented some of the devastation we see on their infrastructure within their own country and made them more reliant on the United States and our allies, wouldn’t you say?
Dr. Stent: Yes, I think so.
Sen. Fischer: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
# # #