Matt Spetalnick and Simon Lewis by Steve Holland

WASHINGTON, (Reuters) – He threatened Russia with the most severe sanctions. He sought to mobilize the U.S. allies towards a common cause. He provided Ukraine with more arms than any American president. He also increased U.S. troops on NATO’s east flank to show his support.

     Despite U.S. President Joe Biden’s efforts to head off a Russian attack against Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin was undeterred. He authorized a “special military operations” in the Donbass area of eastern Ukraine on Thursday. This marked a new high for post-Cold War tensions.

It was unclear at this point what the scope of the offensive would be. There were explosions heard around Kyiv, as well in other regions of Ukraine. Volodymyr Zelenskiy the Ukrainian President stated that Russia launched missile strikes at Ukrainian infrastructure.

It is possible that the way Biden manages the crisis will have major implications on his political prospects and U.S. relations.

Biden promised that the United States would and will respond to Russia’s unprovoked, unjustified attacks.

    But his handling of the biggest international crisis of his presidency has been deemed something of a mixed bag so far.

Biden’s role was never going to change. His administration stated that it would help Ukraine in any way it could, but not send troops to the front.

The American people are reluctant to intervene in Afghanistan or Iraq, which is why he prefers diplomatic and financial sanctions.

Putin enjoyed the benefit of knowing that Biden would not go to war to stop another nuclear power from protecting a country sharing a long frontier with Russia. Washington also had no defense agreements with Russia.

FOCUS ON NATO’S EASTERN FLANCK

Biden focused instead on coordinating with NATO allies, especially those in the east worried about the spillover from Russia’s buildup of 150,000 troops on Ukraine’s borders.

Washington spearheaded an initial round of sanctions after Putin ordered troops into two separatist-controlled breakaway regions after recognizing them as independent on Feb. 21. The warning shot failed to stop Thursday’s actions.

Biden used the prelude to make dire warnings about an impending invasion in order to demonstrate that he was aware of what Putin was doing – even though he could not stop him.

A key result has been to re-energize a Western military alliance that had fallen into disrepair under Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, who had questioned the value of NATO.

A senior European diplomat described Biden’s consultations with allies as “exemplary,” a contrast to how many partners viewed last year’s chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Some analysts questioned, however, whether deploying a few thousand additional U.S. troops to Germany, Poland and Romania was sufficient and suggested Biden could have done more to maintain a credible military option.

“One of the shortcomings is the deterrence package that we’ve developed is kind of asymmetrical in that it’s mostly economic and we’re facing a military threat,” said Ian Kelly, a former U.S. ambassador to the OSCE and Georgia.

Kelly stated that Biden could have asked for activation by NATO Response Force. Kelly then sent it to Poland, the Baltic states with the message “You’ve gathered troops along your border. We have troops on the border, and we will leave when you are gone.

PRAISE FOR ALLIANCE BUILDERING

    Analysts credit Biden with working with allies to prepare of sanctions aimed at crippling the Russian economy and hitting Putin’s inner circle. Germany was long considered to be the weak link and Biden convinced it to stop approvals of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

The next steps may include an effort to cut Russia’s ties to the global financial market.

Some U.S. legislators argued that it would be more effective to place sanctions on Russia sooner, while Biden officials claimed that this would reduce their effectiveness now.

    U.S. officials have acknowledged that sanctions could spur higher oil prices, adding to Biden’s challenge of fighting inflation.

It is yet to see whether Putin will be compelled to withdraw from sanctions.

Biden’s decision to declassify intelligence about what it alleged were Russian plots to fabricate pretexts for a Ukraine invasion was also praised for countering Putin’s misinformation.

Andrew Weiss, a Russia expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace think tank in Washington, said this “kept Putin in the hotseat.”

However, the government was criticised for failing to provide concrete evidence. Commentators recall intelligence claims that were used to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003 to renew a nuclear program, but which proved to be false.

NATO’S ‘OPEN DOOR’

    Biden was also hailed by Western governments for sticking to NATO’s “open door” for aspiring members. Some critics suggested that Biden could have made it clearer about Ukraine’s distance from joining NATO, as Putin was keen to avoid further eastward expansion of the security agreement.

Biden’s reaction could have implications for U.S. relations with China. China may take Biden’s softening of Moscow as an acceptance to act against Taiwanese self-rule, which Beijing regards as a rebel province.

Biden was openly vocal with Putin and other world leaders as the crisis escalated. He also took a firm stand against the ex-KGB officer, to whom Trump had been respectful.

Behind closed doors, a cross-government “Tiger Team” conducted tabletop exercises gaming out every possible scenario.

Putin’s defiance might give Republicans ammunition to use against Biden, his fellow Democrats and Biden in November midterm congressional elections. These will be the final vote in Washington on the balance in power.

And Biden’s strategy leading up to the Russian attack will come under closer scrutiny as he charts the path forward.