No-Fly Zone Alternatives for Ukraine

1: Support Combat Air Patrols to Aid Evacuation, Supply Lines [Bryan Clark]

"A group of former national security officials proposed NATO establish a partial no-fly-zone over Ukraine for the purpose of protecting humanitarian evacuations. Although a good idea in principle, in practice, a no-fly zone to is unnecessary and creates multiple challenges for NATO militaries. Preventing operations by Russian aircraft even in limited areas will still require that NATO gain air superiority over most of Ukraine, requiring potentially hundreds of fighter jets that will be guarding mostly empty airspace.

"NATO airpower would be more effectively used supporting combat air patrols over evacuation routes and shipments of aid and weapons into Ukraine. Unlike the absolutism of a no-fly zone, combat air patrols would be episodic and tied to specific movements. As a result, they could be conducted by the smaller force of Ukrainian fighters, supported by NATO airborne early warning and command aircraft and refueling tankers. And if Ukraine needed to devote its aircraft to other missions, NATO could transition its own fighters to combat air patrols. Although this would mark an uptick in NATO’s involvement in the war, combat air patrols would be guarding NATO-sanctioned operations rather than hunting down Russian forces.

"To defend Ukrainian airspace away from combat air patrols, the U.S. could flow in more Stingers, NATO countries could send in SA-10, SA-20, and S-300 air defense systems, which are available in Poland, Bulgaria, and Romania. The U.S. could also send in Army Avenger short-range air defense vehicles, which may be simple enough to quickly use without a lot of training."

2: Protect Civilian Evacuation Corridors [William Schneider]

"An alternative approach to a no-fly zone that could provide the civilians in Ukraine a measure of relief would be to employ armed USAF MQ-9s at scale to protect civilian evacuation corridors. Civil evacuation from war zones is protected under international law. This objective could facilitate international diplomatic support for the use of specialized military power to protect civilians in a war zone.

"The U.S. Air Force has approx. 300 MQ-9s which the Biden administration wants to phase out. The infrastructure is in place for a GOCO [government-owned, contractor-operated] employment (with Ukrainian trigger-pullers). The onboard sensors and processing as well as organic strike assets (e.g., Hellfire, Paveway, Mk82, SDB, etc.) could engage armored vehicles as well as artillery tube and rocket artillery systems. My understanding is that none of the Turkish TB-2 UAS have been shot down. A 3 or 4 squadron deployment operating 24/7 could substantially attenuate the threat and could support safe corridors for the evacuation of at-risk civilians.

"The U.S. government will need to get past its reluctance to provide real-time intelligence, including using the Global Hawk for ground target designation. The Russian use of rocket artillery (especially the BM-21 MRL) is generating vast civilian casualties and civil destruction. These otherwise vulnerable platforms could be readily dispatched once located."

3: Stage an International Humanitarian Airlift [Douglas Feith and John Hannah]

"Having refused to establish a no-fly zone, President Biden needs more options to deal with enormous and urgent humanitarian needs. We propose an international airlift, organized and supported by the U.S. The goal would be to provide food, medicine and other nonmilitary supplies for days, weeks and maybe longer. Countries viewed as not hostile to Russia—perhaps Brazil, Egypt, India and the United Arab Emirates—could take the lead in flying planes into Ukraine."

Forwarded to you by a friend? Sign up to receive Re: Ukraine here.