Can someone edit my issue briefing and make sure it is in MLA format (one thousand words). I already have everything typed up.

Each student will select a current issue related to U.S. foreign policy to write an issue brief about. The topic can be on any subject that is of interest to the student as long as it is connected to the course subject (U.S. foreign policy) and is approved by the course instructor. Students are expected to become experts in their chosen subject and conduct extensive background research prior to writing their brief.

The topic must be approved by the professor by November 13. Only one student will be allowed to write a brief for each subject and rights to a topic will be doled out on a first-come first-serve basis. The brief is due the last day of class, Friday, December 6.

An issue brief is not a simple term paper. Instead, it is a detailed analysis of a critical public policy question. The brief will be 1,000 words in length and contain the following elements:

1: Issue Summary 2: Background Information 3: Analysis of the Problem 4: Identification of Key Obstacles 5: Policy Options & Recommendation for Future Action

This is my brief:

Issue Summary/Background Information

Ukraine's security against the Russian invasion is at a very delicate stage. Tensions between Russia and Ukraine had been brewing for years before the tipping point in 2014 when Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea against international law and treaties. This brazen land grab shocked the world and set the two countries down a dangerous path. Eight years later, the situation dramatically escalated with Russia's shocking full-scale invasion of its smaller neighbor, unleashing brutality on a scale not seen in Europe since World War II. In late 2022, Russian forces rapidly seized vast swaths of southeastern Ukraine, seizing the key transportation hub of Kurakhove after months of fierce clashes. By early winter, over 90 square miles had fallen under their control, dealing a heavy blow in the Donbas region.

U.S. aid totals: So far, over three-quarters of a billion American tax dollars have poured into Ukraine's resistance, a historic amount that dwarfs other contributors and makes Uncle Sam Kyiv's biggest benefactor by far as the bloody conflict enters its ninth month. According to a recent analysis by the Congressional Research Service, about forty-three billion has gone towards replenishing spent weapons and procuring sophisticated new systems, keeping Ukrainian troops equipped to fight another day against a larger threat.

A mounting humanitarian crisis: After nearly two years of constant warfare, the heavy human toll of the conflict has grown immense. Over 6 million Ukrainians have been displaced from their homes, according to the United Nations, with untold thousands among the dead. Cities like Mariupol still lie in ruins, witness to the savage costs of Putin's invasion.

A change in Washington: Donald Trump regained the U.S. presidency in a narrow victory. His selection of veteran diplomat Keith Kellogg as special representative to Ukraine and Russia signaled hopes within the Administration for a renewed push on negotiations. However, Zelensky's government remained steadfast in its refusal to cede sovereignty over occupied lands. Still, the controversial "America First" stance has prompted valid questions about sustainable American backing for Ukraine's cause.

At the core of the complex situation are three pressing matters: discouraging further Russian exploits, regulating the probability of nuclear intensification, and preserving NATO solidarity.

Analysis of the Problem

1.Discouraging Russian Aggression

Recent Russian advances in Donetsk have exposed Ukraine's vulnerabilities. Russian regional forces have grown by 30% in the last two months, with artillery firepower increasing by 40% (Institute for the Study of War).

Ukraine relies heavily on advanced U.S. weapons systems like HIMARS and Patriot missiles to maintain its defenses. Without continued aid, Ukrainian forces risk losing key positions.

2.Preventing Escalation to Nuclear Conflict

Putin's nuclear threats remain a grave concern. He has stated on multiple occasions that Russia will use "all tools" to defend its territory. Experts at theRAND Corporationcaution that while the risk of nuclear war is low, the likelihood of miscalculation increases as tensions escalate.

Recent missile strikes near NATO supply routes in Poland underscore the potential for accidental escalation, which could inadvertently drag NATO into the conflict (The Times).

3.Preserving NATO Unity

NATO has demonstrated solidarity but faces challenges in maintaining cohesion. Eastern European countries remain steadfast in supporting Ukraine, while others, like Germany and Hungary, express reservations due to economic and energy concerns (Congressional Research Service).

Division within NATO weakens the alliance's credibility and risks emboldening Russia.

4.Domestic Political Divisions

Trump's reelection has amplified debates over U.S. involvement in Ukraine. Isolationist factions argue for redirecting resources to domestic issues, while others emphasize the importance of upholding democratic principles. If U.S. aid becomes unpredictable, Ukraine's ability to sustain its counteroffensive will be jeopardized.

Identification of Key Obstacles

1.Putin's Nuclear Manipulation

Putin uses nuclear rhetoric to instill fear and deter Western intervention. Even limited use of nuclear weapons would have catastrophic global consequences, as noted by theCarnegie Endowment for International Peace.

2.Sustainability of U.S. Support

Domestic economic issues, including inflation, divide the $75 billion aid package. Congressional debates threaten to undermine future funding (Congressional Research Service).

3.Maintaining NATO Cohesion

Divergent priorities among NATO member states pose challenges to unified action. Eastern allies demand robust support, while others urge caution to avoid provoking Russia (RAND Corporation).

4.Challenges of Diplomacy

Reaching a peace deal is complicated. Russia demands territorial concessions, while Ukraine insists on restoring its pre-2014 borders. Achieving compromise will require significant international pressure and skilled diplomacy.

Policy Options & Recommendation for Future Action

1.Pursue a Negotiated Peace Deal

Diplomacy must be the top priority. Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg should lead negotiations, with the involvement of mediators like China and India, which maintain influence over Russia.

Potential compromises include establishing demilitarized zones or phasing out sanctions based on verified Russian withdrawals.

2.Sustain Targeted Military Support

Maintaining limited military assistance is essential to ensure Ukraine retains negotiation leverage. The continued provision of defensive weapons like HIMARS and Patriots and humanitarian aid is crucial.

3.Strengthen NATO Unity

The U.S. must address fissures within NATO by providing hesitant members with financial incentives and energy security guarantees. Clear communication of shared strategic goals can promote unity and deter Russian aggression.

4.Mitigate Nuclear Risks

The U.S. should pursue arms control talks with Russia parallel to its Ukraine strategy. Establishing communication protocols can prevent miscalculations and reduce the risk of escalation.

5.Address Domestic Concerns

Public support for U.S. involvement depends on clear communication about the stakes. Framing aid to Ukraine as a defense of democracy and international norms can foster bipartisan consensus.

Effective communication regarding Ukraine's strategic significance can cultivate public understanding of why American leadership is imperative. A bipartisan consensus may form by emphasizing how support for Ukraine deters authoritarian encroachment worldwide. The United States must implement a nuanced approach, prioritizing diplomacy but maintaining vital military aid. Reaching an agreement to end the conflict is imperative, as allowing escalation to continue unabated risks potential catastrophe. Simultaneously, withdrawing support could prematurely jeopardize Ukraine's self-defense capabilities, empowering Russian aggression and undermining stability worldwide. The severity of the issues at hand cannot be overstated. Fractures within NATO or diminished American leadership would have expansive repercussions. As the leading proponent of democracy and international law, the U.S. is responsible for pursuing peace through proportionate and pragmatic means while upholding key principles of national sovereignty.