Ukraine war: Is the US goal in Ukraine to degrade Russian capabilities more broadly?

Kylie Atwood and Jennifer Hansler (Austin says US wants to see Russia's military capabilities weakened CNN 04/25/2022) report on public statements from Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on the Russia-Ukraine war. Austin's statement seems to have a very different emphasis than Blinken's.

"We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can't do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine," Austin said at the news conference. "So it has already lost a lot of military capability. And a lot of its troops, quite frankly. And we want to see them not have the capability to very quickly reproduce that capability."

Blinken told reporters that Russian attempts to "subjugate Ukraine and take its independence" has "failed."

"Russia has sought as its principal aim to totally subjugate Ukraine, to take away its sovereignty, to take away its independence -- that has failed. It has sought to assert the power of its military and its economy. We, of course, are seeing just the opposite, a military that is dramatically underperforming and an economy ... as a result of sanctions that is in shambles," Blinken said.

"We don't know how the rest of this war will unfold, but we do know that a sovereign independent Ukraine will be around a lot longer than Vladimir Putin is on the scene," he said. [my emphasis]

The fact that Austin said that the US goal was specifically to degrade Russia's military capabilities, not just to support Ukraine in fighting against Russian conquest, seems like another verbal escalation. One which seems to play into Putin's current propaganda line that the war in Ukraine is a war by NATO against Russia. Nicola Slawson reports (First Thing: Russia accuses Nato of ‘proxy war’ in Ukraine Guardian 04/26/2022):

Russia’s foreign minister has accused Nato of fighting a proxy war by supplying military aid to Ukraine, as defence ministers gathered in Germany for US-hosted talks on supporting Ukraine through what one US general called a “very critical” few weeks.

Sergei Lavrov told Russian state media: “Nato, in essence, is engaged in a war with Russia through a proxy and is arming that proxy. War means war.”

Looking at the full transcript, I see that CNN omitted the immediately preceding sentence, which in this case provides important context, "We want to see Ukraine remain a sovereign country, a democratic country able to protect its sovereign territory." So Austin put it in the context of defending Ukraine.

Still, stating out loud that the US goal is specifically to weakened Russia's military capabilities is a rhetorical escalation. Of course, it goes without saying that the military in any country would prefer to see the military capabilities of adversaries be weaker. But making it a part of the public diplomacy is a different thing.

Here is a worthwhile interview with Daniel Ellsberg, who knows a lot about war: Who really benefits from war? UpFront/Aljazeera English 04/29/2022

 This interview with Anatol Lieven of the Quincy Institute addresses Austin's comment, Is the U.S. Treating the Ukraine Conflict as a Proxy War Against Russia? Democracy Now! 04/28/2022:

It's always important to keep China's position in mind. Here is a short essay by Paul Haenle and Sam Bresnick from earlier this month (China’s Ukraine Calculus Is Coming Into Focus Carnegie Institute 04/04/2022):

China’s pro-Russia, anti-U.S., and anti-NATO rhetoric is principally aimed at the Chinese domestic audience. ... But China’s rhetoric is also aimed at the rest of Asia. [Chinese Foreign Minister] Wang has claimed that the Quad is a NATO-like organization designed to counter China’s growing influence. By making the case that NATO expansion caused the Ukraine conflict, China is carefully warning its neighbors that the creation or growth of minilateral or multilateral security groupings could bring violence to the Indo-Pacific.

The Carnegie Institute also has this interview with Haenle and Tong Zhao (How China Has Handled Its Strategic Dilemma Over Russia’s Invasion 04/12/2022), in which Zhao observes:

My impression is that this war is increasing China’s overall concern about the United States because Beijing has a different understanding of the nature of the war and America’s role therein. China genuinely blames the United States and NATO for causing the conflict and believes that the United States and its Western allies launched a coordinated effort to strangle Russia using all sorts of illegal measures, including crippling sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and political demonization. China sees this as happening because Russia was simply trying to defend its legitimate interests.

I think this dynamic reinforces many Chinese strategists’ previous beliefs that the United States is the ultimate “black hand” behind all of this because Washington is inherently hegemonic. They believe that the United States is inherently biased against different political systems, such as those favored by Russia and China. This strengthens the existing power-centric mindset in China and will motivate Beijing to focus on building its material power and to prepare for its eventual contest with the United States. In this context, China believes that Russia’s importance as a strategic partner is even more salient to its eventual contest with the United States, as only Russia can provide China with critical support. This makes China even less likely to undermine its partnership with Russia simply so it can please the United States. [my emphasis]