Is Biden Confused, or Is the White House Sending Mixed Messages on Russia?

Despite the Kremlin denying allegations they’re preparing a chemical weapons attack, many European leaders are concerned that such an event is inevitable, and concerns about this prompted Biden to warn Putin against doing so, and promise a response from the United States if he does.

“I’m not going to speak about the intelligence, but Russia would pay a severe price if it used chemical weapons,” Biden told reporters Friday morning.

Hogwash, I say. Biden likes to talk tough for the cameras, but White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki already indicated on Thursday that a biological or chemical attack in Ukraine wouldn’t be considered a “red line” by the Biden administration—a threshold that would prompt the United States to get directly involved.

“Would use of chemical or biological weapons be a red line for the president in terms of direct U.S. involvement in the war over there?” a reporter asked Psaki on Thursday.

Psaki tried to be evasive by insisting we’re already “directly involved” due to the aid we’re providing, but the reporter said that “involvement” meant sending in military troops.

“With the U.S. military going and engaging in Ukraine and fighting a war against Russia?” Psaki said. “We don’t have any intention to do that.”

Psaki also reiterated that the policy of the Biden administration is that sending U.S. troops to fight in Ukraine is not in our national security interests.

But what else can we do that we haven’t already done? It sure sounded like Biden established that Russia using chemical weapons in Ukraine would be a “red line” a day after Jen Psaki insisted it most definitely was not.

So, has Biden changed his mind? Probably not, but what exactly did Joe Biden mean that Russia would pay a “severe price” if it uses chemical weapons. More sanctions? If the embargo on Russian oil isn’t enough to contain Putin and end this invasion, are more sanctions going to help? Not likely. Biden has promised Russia will pay a “severe price” but military engagement is off the table. So, what exactly will this severe price look like? If Putin knows that military engagement is off the table, can we really expect Biden’s threat to be taken seriously by Putin?

Regardless of whether you agree with the possibility of U.S. troops assisting Ukraine against Russia’s invasion, taking that option off the table was a strategic blunder, and Biden’s threat against Russia feels empty and weak because of it. What is the severe price that Putin will pay? Does Biden even know? Regardless, the confusing mixed messages from this White House are incredibly problematic.