A no-fly zone is a bad idea that just won't go away
The U.S. shouldn't try to establish a "no-fly zone" over Ukraine. It's a terrible idea that would draw us directly into war with Russia, which is something nobody should want to happen.
For some reason, though, the idea just won't go away.
Politico reported Tuesday morning that 27 "foreign policy heavyweights" have written a new letter calling for a different kind of no-fly zone in Ukraine — one oriented more toward humanitarian concerns and not so much toward repelling Russia's invasion forces. "It is time for the United States and NATO to step up their help for Ukrainians before more innocent civilians fall victim to Putin's murderous madness," the group wrote.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
That sounds almost reasonable and right, until you realize — as Politico notes — that even that limited intervention would still probably end in a clash between U.S. and Russian forces.
Similarly, Fox News' Jacqui Heinrich reported on Monday that "some members of Congress are beginning to advocate for a non-kinetic no-fly zone — something to the effect of using electromagnetic pulse, sonar, and cyber to keep Russian jets on the ground so they can never take off." That's probably silly, idle fantasizing — sonar? — but it suggests a few hawkish members of the U.S. government are still itching to get America more deeply, if indirectly, embedded in the fight.
What both ideas share with each other (and with former President Trump's suggestion of attacking Russian forces using U.S. planes painted with Chinese flags) is an apparent desire to repel the invasion without quite taking responsibility for that act. To be fair, that's already something that's happening: Ukrainians are using American-provided anti-tank missiles to wreak havoc on the invaders. Getting directly involved with the use of American pilots and troops, though, is something different. Giving a humanitarian gloss to U.S. war-making wouldn't suddenly make it not war-making; neither would using "non-kinetic" means to ground the Russian air force. Vladimir Putin would regard that as an act of war, as would Americans if the Russians used such means against us.
At some level, the people making the proposals recognize this. One of the letter signers, former NATO commander Philip Breedlove, acknowledged last week to NPR that a no-fly zone is a "big step": "A no-fly zone, if it is truly a military no-fly zone, is essentially an act of war because that means you are willing to enforce it, meaning those who violate it you would shoot at." He wants to do it anyway.
It's awful to feel powerless in the face of the gut-wrenching scenes coming out of Ukraine. But provoking a clash between Americans and Russians unacceptably raises the odds of a much greater catastrophe. Establishing a no-fly zone is still a bad idea, no matter what cute twist is used to try to make it otherwise.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a writer with 30 years of newspaper and online journalism experience. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic and The Kansas City Star. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
5 ladylike cartoons about women's role in the election
Cartoons Artists take on the political gender gap, Lady Liberty, and more
By The Week US Published
-
The right to die: what can we learn from other countries?
The Explainer A look at the world's assisted dying laws as MPs debate Kim Leadbeater's proposed bill
By The Week Published
-
Volkswagen on the ropes: a crisis of its own making
Talking Point The EV revolution has 'left VW in the proverbial dust'
By The Week UK Published
-
What happens if Russia declares war on Nato?
Today's Big Question Fears are growing after Vladimir Putin's 'unusually specific warning' to Western governments
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK Published
-
Iran and Israel: is all-out war inevitable?
Talking Points Tehran has vowed revenge for assassinations of Hamas and Hezbollah leaders, but Gaza ceasefire could offer way out
By The Week UK Published
-
Are Ukraine's F-16 fighter jets too little too late?
Today's Big Question US-made aircraft are 'significant improvement' on Soviet-era weaponry but long delay and lack of trained pilots could undo advantage against Russia
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Ukraine's stolen children
Under the Radar Officially 20,000 children have been detained since Russia's invasion in 2022, but the true number is likely to be far higher
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
A brief timeline of Russia's war in Ukraine
In Depth How the Kremlin's plan for a quick conquest turned into a quagmire
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Why is Ukraine backing far-right militias in Russia?
Today's Big Question The role of the fighters is a 'double-edged sword' for Kyiv, say commentators
By The Week UK Published
-
What does victory now look like for Ukraine?
Today's Big Question Not losing is as important as winning as the tide turns in Russia's favour again
By Elliott Goat, The Week UK Published
-
Grant Shapps goes to war on military's 'woke' diversity policies
Talking Point Defence secretary condemns 'extremist culture' as Army reportedly plans to relax security checks on overseas recruits
By The Week UK Published