Eighty years ago, the hinge of history swung just north of Ukraine. There, the outcome of World War II in Europe was determined in the largest tank battle ever, a boiling cauldron in what was called the Kursk salient.
Raging from July 5 to Aug. 23, 1943, the clash between German and Soviet forces involved what military historian John Keegan termed "tank armadas," a total of about 6,000 tanks and 2 million troops. After this, Germany never again had the strategic initiative on the Eastern Front, where, 10 months before D-Day, attrition guaranteed Adolf Hitler's defeat.
Today, the outcome of the first major European war since 1945 might turn on tanks, particularly German Leopard 2s. German tanks sealing the defeat of a Russian aggression: History teaches a dark sense of irony.
Every war must end, and this one will end as most do, with less than justice done. But more justice will be done if Ukraine is ascendant when the end comes.
Writing in the Financial Times, Lawrence Freedman, author of "Command: The Politics of Military Operations from Korea to Ukraine," argues that "the only way to persuade Russia that it cannot succeed in its war of conquest is for Ukraine's armed forces to liberate much more territory. This requires a significant boost to the next offensive." Which requires tanks.
Ukraine's allies have been sensibly, but perhaps excessively, worried about provoking Vladimir Putin by crossing this or that "red line" that the Russian president might have drawn in his opaque mind. Since the Russian invasion began 11 months ago, however, about 3,000 Ukrainian soldiers have received training from the U.S. Army in Europe.
Contingents of approximately 500 Ukrainian soldiers will soon begin training in Germany on the use of armored fighting vehicles. Other Ukrainian soldiers are heading to Fort Sill, Okla., about 5,800 miles from Kyiv, for training on the Patriot missile defense system.
The "Oklahoma front" in this U.S.-NATO proxy war with Russia is another step in the Biden administration's delicate incrementalism: The step warns Putin to not anticipate a ceiling on U.S. and NATO material support for Ukraine, short of direct involvement.
And prudence does not mean erring on the side of anachronistic assessments of the Russian menace. Historian Antony Beevor in Foreign Affairs reminds us:
"After 1945, the Red Army's achievements in winter warfare gave it a fearsome reputation in the West. It was not until the Soviet Union's ill-planned invasion of Czechoslovakia in the summer of 1968 -- the Warsaw Pact forces lacked maps, food supplies, and fuel -- that Western analysts first began to suspect that they might have overestimated the Soviets' warfighting abilities."
A day after France said earlier this month that it was sending Ukraine armored vehicles that some analysts call "light tanks," President Biden announced the dispatch to Ukraine of armored combat vehicles. He did so in a joint statement with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who also pledged to send such vehicles. Yet Scholz seems reluctant to provide Ukraine with Germany's Leopard 2 tanks, of which there are an estimated 2,000 in 13 other European armies.
Ukraine says it needs 300 more tanks for an effective offensive. Britain is said to be planning to send a squadron of 14 Challenger 2 tanks: A spokesman for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak says "battle tanks could provide a game-changing capability."
Poland, which has agreed to a $1.4 billion purchase of 116 U.S. Abrams main battle tanks, says it will send about 14 Leopard 2 tanks but will do so "as part of the building of an international coalition."
So, much depends on Germany shedding its hesitancy regarding tanks for Ukraine, which should not suffer today because Germany is haunted by what very different Germans did three generations ago, before and after Kursk.
Astonishingly, some congressional Republicans, being parsimonious where this is least virtuous, profess alarm about the cost of aid to Ukraine. In 2022, this was 0.09% of the United States' gross domestic product.
Eighty years ago, the Soviet Union ground down German forces, using the U.S. lend-lease material, including 183,000 trucks received by the summer of 1943. U.S. lives were saved on the Western Front by U.S. Studebakers on the Eastern Front.
Today, sustaining Ukraine's punishment of Russia's criminality will radically reduce the threat of future aggression from the only nation motivated by delusions to precipitate a large European war. Purchasing this reduction with the currency of tanks would be a historic bargain.
George Will writes for the Washington Post.
Nick Sibilla, guest columnist
With labor shortages growing, a new bill in the Nebraska Legislature would slash through the state’s thicket of licensing red tape.
Today, Nebraska licenses more than 170 different occupations, covering almost one-fifth of the state’s entire workforce. But the state’s rigid licensing laws make it harder for people to find work, especially for those coming from out of state or out of prison. Fortunately, LB16, sponsored by Sen. Tom Briese, would achieve two vital reforms.
First, LB16 would promote interstate mobility through universal license recognition. Under the bill, Nebraska would recognize any license issued by another state or the military, provided it meets a handful of common-sense conditions. The license must have been held for at least a year, is still in good standing and covers a similar scope of practice to Nebraska’s version.
Rather than force newcomers to potentially waste hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars on classes that teach what they already know, LB16 would save them the trouble. After all, workers don’t lose their skills and expertise when they cross state lines.
Reform in other states has already started to reap rewards. Take Arizona. Since 2019, when Arizona enacted universal license recognition, the state has granted more than 6,000 licenses, according to the Goldwater Institute.
As more jobs have gone remote during the pandemic, America’s workforce will become more mobile than ever. For states to remain competitive, labor market flexibility is vital. In fact, 19 states have already enacted some form of universal license recognition — including every single one of Nebraska’s neighbors.
Second, to help people with criminal records find work and re-enter society, LB16 would eliminate many unfair licensing restrictions. If enacted, applicants could only be disqualified if they had been convicted of a crime that “directly and specifically relates” to the job at hand. Before they can deny a license application, the licensing board must offer the applicant an opportunity to be heard and make their case.
Under LB16, boards wouldn’t be able to disqualify candidates based on nonviolent misdemeanors, juvenile adjudications or arrests that didn’t result in a conviction. In addition, the reform would ban boards from considering convictions that happened more than three years ago, though that time limit would not apply to felonies involving violence, sexual abuse or fraud. Although LB16 exempts a handful of licenses, the licenses that are affected would have some of the nation’s best protections for ex-offenders.
Since a steady job is one of the best ways to prevent re-offending, laws that limit employment opportunities may actually worsen public safety. One study from Arizona State University found that states with more burdensome licensing laws have increasing rates of recidivism compared to those with lower burdens. In fact, when it came to influencing a state’s recidivism rate, “the occupational licensing burden was second only to the overall labor market conditions” in that state.
Meanwhile, providing a fresh start lets more individuals prosper. For instance, after Illinois eliminated many licensing barriers for ex-offenders, nearly 3,200 people have become licensed, according to a report by the Institute for Justice, Barred from Working.
That includes people like Lisa Creason, who wanted to become a nurse but was disqualified due to a 30-year-old conviction. Refusing to give up, Lisa urged Illinois lawmakers to change the law. In the end, she won. Now Lisa is one of the more than 1,000 nurses with criminal records who have been licensed since the reform.
LB16 is a common-sense reform that has won the support of a broad, bipartisan coalition, including the Platte Institute, the ACLU of Nebraska and the Institute for Justice.
Nick Sibilla is a legislative analyst at the Institute for Justice and the author of “Barred from Working.” He lives in Arlington, Virginia.
Nothing gets folks buzzing quite like preliminary property valuations. And the release of them in Lancaster County last week did just that.
One didn't have to go far to find someone -- in person or online -- who was shocked that his or her home had shot up 10% to 30% -- range of most increases, according to newly-elected County Assessor Dan Nolte.
But in a Journal Star story on the increases, Richard Meginnis, a Lincoln City Council member and president of NAI FMA Realty, made a critical point. There are two components to your property tax bill -- your property's valuation and the tax rates set by entities like the city, county and, most prominently, Lincoln Public Schools.
"These numbers (valuations) don't raise your taxes unless government entities go for it," Meginnis said.
And we say that it's not the time for them to "go for it." Bodies dependent on property taxes should -- in their next budget cycles -- lower their levies to collect the same revenue that was generated on property before the revaluation.
While there is an appeals process (that starts June 1) for individuals, and some folks may have very legitimate beefs, it should've come as a surprise to no one that their property values shot up. They were virtually unchanged the prior year while the market was soaring, and that momentum carried well into 2022 before inflation and interest rates cooled things.
Assessments are based on real market sales, which are objective, on comparable properties, and it's in what is "comparable" that most folks ground their gripes.
Folks' pocketbooks are taking a pounding these days due to inflationary pressures. Households are forced to make choices about spending, sometimes hard choices.
It's reasonable to ask our taxing entities to do the same thing, to commit to fiscal responsibility on behalf of constituents by lowering levies to compensate for increased property valuations.
Unless you're selling your house in the very near future, your higher valuation isn't good news. It doesn't mean you have more income to cover a fatter property tax bill.
Our local taxing authorities have generally been responsible stewards of our tax dollars. Now is the time to cement that message by holding their expense lines and lowering their rates as they plan for their next budget years.
Property owners may be agitated now by steep valuation increases, but no one will know the real impact until much later in the process. The real complaining will begin later this year if local taxing authorities choose to take the windfall from dramatically higher valuations.
