Tag: Vladimir Putin

Posted on

Russia | Putin in Crisis

From Foreign Affairs, June 24th:

On Friday night, political infighting in Moscow spilled out into the open, with Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of Russia’s Wagner mercenary group, accusing the Russian military of attacking his forces and vowing to retaliate. In messages published on his official Telegram channel, Prigozhin also claimed that all of the Kremlin’s publicly stated reasons for launching the war in Ukraine were lies. Following these developments, Russia’s state security agency, the FSB, opened a criminal case against Prigozhin, accusing him of calling for an armed rebellion….

Russian TV

Prigozhin has seized control of Rostov-on-Don, the major logistical hub for the war in Ukraine, with vast stockpiles of munitions and supplies. He now has complete control of Russia’s ability to continue the war in Ukraine, giving him a strong negotiating position to settle his dispute with the Kremlin.

Rostov-on-Don

Rostov-on-Don Interview

At this stage, an advance on Moscow seems unlikely.

It is dangerous to predict how events will unfold. Already the window for negotiations is closing.

Rostov-on-Don

There are reports of Wagner seizing a second major city on the road to Moscow, meeting little opposition.

Voronezh

Tom Nichols in The Atlantic:

“Think of this conflict not as a contest between the Russian state and a mercenary group, but a falling out among gangsters, a kind of Mafia war…..

But no matter how this ends, Prigozhin has shattered Putin’s narrative, torching the war as a needless and even criminal mistake. That’s a problem for Putin that could outlast this rebellion.”

Michael McFaul, former ambassador to Moscow under the Obama administration, in the Journal of Democracy, February 2023:

Putin’s luck ran out in 2022. By launching a full-scale, barbaric invasion of Ukraine one year ago, Putin has caused horrific bloodshed and suffering in Ukraine, hurting the very “brothers and sisters” he supposedly seeks to “protect” while also failing to achieve most of his war aims. But Putin’s war in Ukraine has also triggered deep damage to his own country, especially to Russia’s armed forces, the economy, society, and, in the long run, to his own regime. Ironically, Putin’s destruction of democracy in Russia decades ago created the conditions for this disastrous decision in 2022 — a decision that may eventually unravel the very autocracy that he constructed and has been consolidating for so long.

Conclusion

Autocracy has two major flaws. First, no one wants to give an autocrat bad news. Dictators only get told what they want to hear, leaving them badly out of touch. Poor decision-making is the inevitable result.

Second, suppression may quell dissent but leaves no release for the buildup of underlying pressures, creating the illusion of stability but fueling the potential to explode into violence at any time.

A breakdown of law and order in Russia, while it may have long-term benefits, is a dangerous situation that could easily spiral out of control. With disastrous consequences not only for the people of Russia but for surrounding regions within Russia’s “sphere of influence”. Belarus, Georgia, Syria, Armenia, Azerbaijan….. all are at risk of unrest as opposing factions attempt to take advantage of a distracted Kremlin.

It also increases the risk of high-risk behavior in Ukraine from the Kremlin.

Zaporizhzia

Posted on

Fiona Hill | Putin is pushing our buttons

British-born Fiona Hill is an expert on Russia and Vladimir Putin and served as security adviser to US Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump. Her take on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is that Vladimir Putin still thinks he is winning. The Kremlin has a far higher tolerance for troop losses than Western governments and Putin believes that he can grind out a victory of sorts. He thinks he has the upper hand in terms of leverage, through his influence on energy markets and food shortages, and is prepared to wait out the West — waiting for them to lose patience and attempt to force a negotiated settlement.

“Putin is a contingency planner. If one thing doesn’t work, he’ll try another. If things get dire, expect more nuclear sabre-rattling. They already rhetorically deployed nuclear weapons, and used them, on national television.

Bear in mind they take a very careful read of us and how we react. Think about when they moved through the Chernobyl exclusion zone into Ukraine….People said they wouldn’t possibly do that but they did. This scares the heck out of everyone….Same thing with Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. They deliberately shelled it. Think about the timing. It was just when Germany and Japan were considering recommissioning their nuclear power plants. All this happens because Putin knows he can push our buttons. He knows our fears and can play to those fears.”

The West has to get ahead of this. But we always tend to do things too late. Earlier action in Ukraine — in terms of supplying weapons — may have deterred Putin.

“Putin and the Kremlin have a major advantage: continuity. They have been in power for a long time and have no effective opposition.

The West, by contrast, has no continuity. This is the main obstacle to getting ahead of the game. Democracies tend to lose focus over time…..The more domestic problems you have, the more likely you are to lose focus.

….Putin’s business is to find points of leverage.

Political donations. Corruption. Germany’s pact with the devil — it’s economy is built on reliance on cheap Russian gas. We have to wind this all back.

Posted on

Putin declares war on Europe

Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is an effective declaration of war against Europe.

This will no more stop at Kyiv than Hitler stopped at the Sudetenland.

Tragic sites of refugees fleeing Russian bombing and helicopter-borne invasion forces occupying Hostomel Airport military airfield, 15 minutes outside the capital.

Twitter

Twitter

Twitter

All of this could have been avoided if the West had shown more resolve.

Kicking the can down the road

The West has been kicking the can down the road for the past 15 years hoping that the problem would go away. Ever since Vladimir Putin laid out his agenda at the Munich security conference in 2007, the West has tried to buy him off with reset buttons and lucrative gas contracts, looking the other way as he embarked on his expansionist plans, starting with invasion of Georgia the following year.

From Ambassador Daniel Fried and Kurt Volker in Politico, seven days ago:

What is more surprising is how the U.S. and Europe, despite Putin’s obvious warning in Munich and Russia’s many actions over 15 years, have nonetheless clung to the notion that we can somehow work together with Putin’s Russia on a strategic level. It is finally time for the West to face facts. Whether or not Putin launches a major new invasion of Ukraine, he has rejected the post-Cold War European security architecture and means it. He is on a deliberate and dedicated path to build a greater Russia, an empire where the Soviet Union once stood…..

Following the speech, Putin matched his words with actions, dismantling the structures designed to keep peace in post-Cold War Europe. Russia formally announced in July 2007 that it would no longer adhere to the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty. It continued to reject the principle of host-nation consent for its troop presence in Georgia and Moldova, and began ignoring Vienna Convention limits on troop concentrations, exercises and transparency.

Judge a tree by the fruit it bears

Europe continued to build a trade relationship with Russia, in the hope that prosperity would mellow Putin. Instead the Kremlin used its oil and gas profits to rearm and modernize its military while cracking down on political opposition and a free press. Deaths of journalists and opposition politicians climbed. Eastern NATO leaders who repeatedly warned the West about the need to confront Russia were dismissed as “warmongers”.

By this stage, the Kremlin had even taken its war against opposition figures abroad, with the murder of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006.

Alexander Litvinenko

In 1998, Litvinenko and several other FSB officers had publicly accused their superiors of ordering the assassination of the Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky. Litvinenko was arrested the following year but acquitted before being re-arrested. The charges were again dismissed and Litvinenko fled with his family to London where they were granted asylum in the UK. He later wrote two books accusing the Russian secret services of staging the Russian apartment bombings in 1999 and other acts of terrorism in an effort to bring Putin to power. He also accused Putin of ordering the assassination of the Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya in 2006. Litvinenko died of polonium-210 poisoning that same year, in London.

A UK public inquiry concluded in 2016 that Litvinenko’s murder was carried out by the two suspects and that they were “probably” acting under the direction of the FSB and with the approval of president Vladimir Putin and then FSB director Nikolai Patrushev.

The Obama Reset

On his election in 2009, Barack Obama sought to reset the relationship with Russia, as if the West was to blame for:

  • the attempted assassination of Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko during his 2004 election campaign — he was poisoned with a potent dioxin that disfigured him but later made a full recovery;
  • widespread denial-of-service cyber attacks on Estonia in 2007; and
  • invasion of Georgia in 2008.

The reset failed badly, with Russia annexing Crimea and invading the Donbas in 2014. Next was Syria in 2015. Responses by the West, including limited sanctions, proved ineffective.

The Salisbury poisonings

In 2018, Russia was the first state to employ chemical weapons against private citizens in a foreign country. In Salisbury, England, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, a Russian citizen, visiting him from Moscow, were poisoned with a Russian-developed Novichok nerve agent and admitted to hospital in a critical condition. UK Prime Minister Theresa May accused Russia of responsibility for the incident and announced the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats in retaliation. A former Russian intelligence officer, Skripal had settled in the UK in 2010 after his conviction on espionage charges in Russia before being exchanged in a spy swap. Both Skripal and his daughter eventually recovered. Moscow refused to cooperate in the interrogation of the two prime suspects, identified by Bellingcat as Alexander Mishkin, a trained military doctor, working for the GRU, and decorated GRU Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga.

GRU Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga and Alexander Mishkin, a trained military doctor, working for the GRU

Conclusion

The signs have been evident for a long time but were largely ignored.

This was always going to end badly. The longer that the West delays, the worse the eventual toll in lives and human suffering.

Former Swedish PM Carl Bildt sums up the situation:

Carl Bildt

The Putin invasion of Ukraine that we now see unfolding is the worst outbreak of war that we have had since Hitler invaded Poland in September of 1939. The same motives, the same techniques, the same lies leading up to it. What will happen now remains to be seen. Sanctions will have to be imposed, although that particular deterrence has obviously failed, but it was good to try. We must help the fight in Ukraine. We must treat the Putin regime in the way that it deserves, in all respects. We are heading for bleak days when it comes to the security of Europe. Transatlantic security will be absolutely key.

Posted on

Never waste a good crisis

The Russian Federation has amassed a large army on the border of Ukraine and threatens to invade unless the US and NATO make concessions including the withdrawal of forces from Eastern Europe, securing Moscow a broad sphere of influence. There has been much hand-wringing in Western media: will Putin invade or is this just a ruse designed to extract concessions?

If we look past the uncertainty, it is clear that an increasingly over-confident Putin has entered a trap of his own making.

The West is faced with an ultimatum: either concede or Russian forces will invade Ukraine.

But every problem presents an opportunity.

The more aggressive Russia becomes, the stronger NATO gets.

Russian actions have united Western alliances, with even long-term neutrals Finland and Sweden, moving closer to NATO.  Both Finnish and Swedish presidents reiterated their right to join NATO in response to the Russian ultimatum.

Germany has long obstructed a stiffening of NATO defenses, increasing its vulnerability to Russian energy blackmail by shuttering nuclear power plants and supporting the Nordstream 2 gas pipeline across the Baltic Sea. But opposition is growing. A recent poll shows that the percentage of Germans who trust Russia has fallen by 11% over the past two years:

German Poll: Which Countries Do You Trust?

Concessions are unlikely, simply because there is nothing to gain from them. Concessions by the US would weaken NATO and encourage the Kremlin to make even more outlandish demands in the future. Concessions by NATO without the US would produce a similar outcome.

Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a strategic mistake.

First, invasion would be a flagrant act of war, removing the cloak of deniability that has covered Russian operations in the Donbas region. A formal state of war would increase the flow of Western technology and weapons into Ukraine as Western leaders are required to openly acknowledge Russian aggression.

Land invasions are costly in terms of both blood and treasure. The Russian army may eventually overrun the Ukrainians through the weight of forces and technological advantages. But Ukrainian armed forces have been in a protracted war in the East and are well-trained and equipped with modern anti-tank weapons, artillery and unmanned drones. The costs would be high.

Turkey’s Bayraktar unmanned combat drone

Turkey’s Bayraktar Unmanned Armed Combat Drone – Source: Ukrinform

Where the Ukrainians are at a disadvantage is in air defenses and vulnerability to long-range missile attacks. But that window is closing.

To stiffen Ukraine’s ability to resist, the United States and NATO have dispatched teams in recent weeks to survey air defenses, logistics, communications and other essentials. The United States likely has also bolstered Ukraine’s defenses against Russian cyberattacks and electronic warfare. (David Ignatius, Washington Post)

An air campaign would also achieve little without a follow-up land invasion.

Even if the Ukrainian forces are defeated, that is where the real problem starts. Occupation is a costly and morale-sapping exercise as the Soviets discovered in Afghanistan in the 1980s and the US discovered in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan (they’re slow learners). An insurgency negates the occupiers’ advantages in air power and technology, leading to a drawn-out campaign with no outcome.

“You have the watches. We have the time.” ~ Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.

A Russian occupation force would require 20 combatants for every 1,000 Ukrainians, according to a formula devised by Rand Corp. analyst James Quinlivan in 1995. That would translate into an a required Russian force of almost 900,000, illustrating the impracticality.

We could expect a Russian occupation to be exceedingly brutal, along the lines of Syria, creating a humanitarian crisis and flooding the West with refugees. But that is only likely to harden resolve, marginalizing appeasers in the West, and increase support for the insurgents.

The cost of an extended Russian campaign would deplete the Russian Treasury, even without increased sanctions. It would also escalate opposition within Russia, spurred by the high cost in lives and deteriorating living conditions. The result would threaten collapse of the Russian state in much the same way as the campaign in Afghanistan led to the eventual disintegration of the Soviet Union.

Conclusion

The threat of armed invasion of Ukraine is a mistake. It is likely to strengthen resolve in the West and, if the threat is carried out, result in a long, protracted war in Ukraine. The cost in both blood and treasure would threaten to topple the Russian state.

Russian overconfidence has led them into a trap. Thinly spread across a number of conflict zones, they are vulnerable to an escalation in insurgencies wherever they have “peace-keeping” occupation forces: Syria, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and now Kazakhstan. The cost to the West would be low but would exact a huge toll on the Kremlin, depleting their military and already-vulnerable financial resources.

“Moderation in the pursuit of liberty is no virtue.”
~  George Crile, Charlie Wilson’s War: The Extraordinary Story of How the Wildest Man in Congress and a Rogue CIA Agent Changed History

Posted on

What would Putin do?

The Communist Party of China has an unwritten contract with the 1.4 billion people living under its rule: they will tolerate living under an autocratic regime provided that the CCP delivers economic prosperity. So far the CCP has delivered in spades. A never-ending economic boom, fueled by exponential debt growth as investment in productive infrastructure grows ever more challenging.

But they are now familiar with the law of diminishing marginal returns: governments can’t just keep spending on infrastructure without falling into a debt trap. All the low-hanging fruit have been picked and new infrastructure projects offer lower and lower returns as spending programs continue.

That was probably the primary motivation for the CCP’s Belt-and-Road Initiative (BRI): to source more productive infrastructure investments in international markets. But the COVID-19 pandemic brought the BRI to a shuddering halt and the CCP is unlikely to maintain its exemplary growth record — no matter how much they fudge the numbers.

Xi Jinping is faced with an impossible task: how to placate 1.4 billion people when inflation sends food prices soaring and ballooning debt precipitates a sharp rise in unemployment and falling wages. The CCP has been preparing for this very eventuality for some time. Investing billions in surveillance and social credit systems, brutal crackdowns on religious organizations and minorities, suppression of democratic forces in Hong Kong, the latest take-down of tech giants — Jack Ma’s Ant Group and Tencent Holdings — which could form a focal point for democratic opposition, and beefing up internal policing. These are not the whims of an autocratic regime but a desperate attempt at self-preservation. China’s internal security budget is even bigger than its military budget (WION).

Xi Jinping

Behind that inscrutable facade, Xi Jinping is a worried man. Even with all the technology and forces of suppression at his disposal, confronting an angry population of 1.4 billion people is a daunting task. In his darkest hours he must have asked himself the question: WHAT WOULD PUTIN DO?

Even if you don’t believe the RT hype of the bare-chested deer hunter, judo expert and chess grandmaster — a combination of Chuck Norris and Garry Kasparov — you have to give Vladimir Putin credit for surviving 20 years as the head of a murderous regime where only the strong and completely ruthless stay alive.

Vladimir Putin

What would Putin do? The answer must have hit Xi Jinping like a 500 watt light bulb: INVADE CRIMEA. Vladimir Putin enjoyed record popularity at home (if you can believe Russian opinion polls) after invading Crimea. Despite the economic hardships that the Russian people had to endure from Western sanctions. The only force more powerful than hunger is a wave of patriotic nationalism.

Now being the canny fellow that he is, Xi figured that Crimea was too far away to be much use. Luckily for him, there is a handy substitute. An island of 23.5 million inhabitants, living under a democratically-elected government, only 180 kilometers away, across the Taiwan Strait.

Conclusion

We expect the CCP to fuel a wave of nationalist fervor to distract the 1.4 billion people living under their harsh rule from the economic hardships they are about to endure. Conflict over Taiwan is an obvious choice.

At present the PLA is conducting daily incursions into Taiwanese airspace, to map ROC air defense systems and wear down defenders with “response fatigue”.

ROC Reports Incursion by 28 PLA Aircraft

The CCP would not want to interfere with the Beijing Winter Olympics but may use it as a distraction — straight out of Putin’s playbook.

Melik Kaylan at Forbes:

I can say one thing about Vladimir Putin without fear of contradiction: he cares about timing. When he’s up to no good, he loves a sleight-of-hand distraction in global headlines. In 2008 [invasion of Georgia], the Beijing summer Olympics served as cover. More recently, the Sochi Winter Olympics ended just three days before Russia marched into Crimea.

Notes

  1. The 2022 Winter Olympics — also known as Beijing 2022 — is scheduled to take place from 4 to 20 February 2022.
Posted on

Why Putin will fail | UPI.com

From Harlan Ullman:

Frozen conflicts are not in Russia’s long-term interest. Of course, while the short-term aim of preventing Georgia and Ukraine from joining NATO because of contested borders is working, the long-term economic damage done to Russia will prove politically destructive. Putin certainly is riding a political tiger. However, he has no clear exit strategy for safely dismounting this dangerous beast. That is a fundamental predicament….

What should the United States do? First, common sense and not confrontation is the best means to exploit Putin’s political weaknesses. By threatening Russia, his public will rally around Putin. This does not mean granting concessions. It means being smart not petulant. It also means shifting NATO’s strategy to local defense based on a “porcupine” posture with emphasis on Stinger-like anti-air and Javelin anti-vehicle missiles all reinforced by alliance capabilities to blunt Russian cyber, propaganda, intimidation and other non-conventional forms of war.

Second, the United States needs to dial back on belligerent rhetoric. By all means plan for “full spectrum war.” But do not use a PR bullhorn to announce what is being done. Teddy Roosevelt applies — speak softly but carry a big stick….

Source: Why Russian President Vladimir Putin will fail – UPI.com

Posted on

A New Cold War? Russia’s Confrontation with the West

Michael A. McFaul, Stanford University professor of political science; director and senior fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; Peter and Helen Bing Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution; Stanford University, former ambassador to Russia (2012 – 2014).

Colin’s Comment:
Here is what I see as the big picture:

  • The current confrontation is more about the actors than about long-term strategy or geopolitical conflict
  • Russia is part of Europe, culturally and economically, and its destiny lies in the West
  • A strong Russia is in the West’s interest — a weak Russia invites encroachment from China in the East
  • The West has to build a strong deterrent to aggression from the current regime
  • While leaving the door open to long-term participation in European democratic structures, scientific cooperation and trade.
Posted on

Russia’s protesting truckers | Euromaidan Press

Vladimir Putin’s worst nightmare — a trucker-Maidan.

Dmytro Homon writes:

First, the protest is spontaneous and is not coordinated from a single center. For that reason, the police have been unable to shut it down because other drivers immediately take the place of the ones detained.

Second, the protestors are not the usual “fifth column” opposition by intellectuals. These are, for the most part, Putin’s voters — tough guys who in elections vote for stability…….

Third, all Russians clearly understand the complaints of the truck drivers. They boil down to the fact that greedy authorities are trying to take the shirt off the back of simple workers…..

For these reasons the usual methods of Russian propaganda are not very effective. The postings of the Olgino trolls (professional commentators from the “troll factory” in the Olgino district of St. Petersburg — Ed.) that these protests are organized by the opposition look ridiculous. Attempts by mass media to ignore the truckers completely are equally ineffective because they have become a major topic in social networks……

Meanwhile, more and more trucks have been arriving to Moscow. What will happen next is a question with no answer yet. In fact, even the truckers themselves do not know what to do after the blockade.

If the Russian authorities use brute force, this risks repeating the fate of Yanukovych. Putin, however, has nowhere to flee from the Kremlin. Well, perhaps to Syria…..

Read more at Russia’s protesting truckers and Putin | Euromaidan Press

Powered by WordPress / WordPress Maintenance Service By Website Helper