Month: February 2022
Stevenson’s army, February 28
– David Frum explains the economic problems Russia faces.
– NYT notes Germany’s pivot.
– NYT explains Israel’s balancing act.
– WaPo notes Russian military problems.
– WSJ says Putin manifesto was required reading in Moscow last summer.
– Tears on K Street.for Russia’s lobbyists.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What happens in Ukraine won’t stay in Ukraine
Here are the speaking notes I prepared on the Balkans and Middle East for this noon’s event on “What’s Next for Russia, Ukraine, and the World?” It featured Johns Hopkins/SAIS faculty:
Balkans
- American policy since the end of the Cold War has aimed at “Europe whole and free.” That isn’t going to happen so long as Putin or someone of his ilk rules Russia.
- Serbia claims neutrality, but its current leadership advocates a “Serbian world” akin to Putin’s “Russian world.” Belgrade also refuses to sanction Moscow. De facto Serbia is siding with Russia.
- That puts Bosnia, Kosovo, and NATO member Montenegro at risk from Serb irredentism.
- The line between democracies and autocracies will therefore also be drawn through the Balkans unless Belgrade changes its inclinations.
Countering Russian ambitions and Moscow’s Serb proxies needs higher priority:
- Deployment of an additional 500 EU troops to Bosnia is a good first step. But more are needed. The UK should augment that deployment. The US should beef up the military presence in Brcko and move some troops to northern Kosovo .
- The EU should tell Serbia that continued adherence to neutrality in Ukraine will result in a halt to the EU accession process.
- The US, UK, and EU should end bilateral and multilateral assistance to Republika Srpska and threaten likewise to Serbia.
Middle East
In the Middle East, the situation is more ambiguous. The interests at stake are less compelling and US policy more accepting of autocracy:
- Syria backs Russia and Iran is attempting the Chinese straddle (for peace but against Ukrainian membership in NATO). Egypt, the UAE, and other small Gulf monarchies are ducking for cover. Saudi Arabia so far has decided to enjoy high oil prices.
- Israel has backed Ukraine, but cautiously to avoid Russian retaliation against its interests in Syria and domestic political complications. Turkey has also backed Ukraine, less cautiously.
- Ultimately, the Middle East will go with the flow. If Russia is successful, no one in the Middle East will refuse to maintain diplomatic relations with a puppet government in Kyiv.
- OPEC+ will gain traction and Russian inroads in the Middle East will expand.
- But if Russia fails, the Middle East countries, democracies and autocracies alike, will claim they supported Ukraine, even if OPEC+ suffers irreparable damage.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Belgrade and Banja Luka should draw the right conclusions
Here is an interview I did for Rasim Belko of Patria, a Sarajevo-based news agency, on the repercussions of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in Bosnia and Herzegovina:
Q: Before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, you announced that Russia would continue to destabilize the Western Balkans. Will Putin go to war with the West in another hotbed such as the Balkans?
A: Russia isn’t going to war in the Balkans, where it has few military resources. But it uses its proxies there to de-stabilize: Serb nationalist organizations, Dodik, and Vucic.
The danger of Bosnian collapse is not the issue
Q: Bosnia and Herzegovina is a key focal point of the Balkans. In your opinion, how real is the danger of its collapse?
A: I would not call the risk “collapse.” There is a real possibility that Dodik will go too far and provoke a response.
Nor is NATO membership for now
Q: Many believe that Bosnia and Herzegovina should be admitted to NATO under a shortened procedure. Do you think it is realistic that this will happen soon?
A: The pre-condition is consensus within the Bosnian leadership. So far as I can tell, that does not exist. I doubt NATO be interested in enlargement so long as the crisis with Russia continues. But eventual NATO membership is certainly possible. I have no problem with Bosnians pressing for a “shortened procedure.”
Separatism demands a vigorous response
Q: Milorad Dodik’s separatist policy is Putin’s dangerous extended arm in the heart of Europe. Have the US and the EU missed the chance to address this threat to peace in the Western Balkans in time?
A: They have waited too long, but there is still time. What has been lacking is political will. The invasion of Ukraine may help the US, UK, and EU find the political will.
Q: Is it time for more concrete and stronger measures of the West towards such a policy of Milorad Dodik?
A: Yes. All international funding that finds its way to Republika Srpska should be cut off.
Serbia has reason to hesitate
Q: Serbia and its President Aleksandar Vučić sided with Russia, and at the same time they are continuously working from Serbia against the sovereignty and integrity of BiH. In your opinion, does Europe have grounds for fear of a Serbian invasion of BiH, like Putin on Ukraine?
A: Nothing about the Russian invasion of Ukraine so far should encourage Serbia. Even Milosevic opted not to intervene openly in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I imagine Vucic will not want to take the risk.
Q: How do you see the outcome around Ukraine and what are the possible consequences for Europe, and especially in relation to the Western Balkans?
A: A quick Russian victory in Ukraine would have been bad news for the Balkans, as it would have encouraged Serb irredentism. In addition, many Serbs in Republika Srpska and in northern Kosovo would welcome an invasion more than the Ukrainians did. That said, things have gone so badly so far for Russia that even a victory would not be very rewarding. And Western solidarity has been strong. Belgrade and Banja Luka should be able to draw the right conclusions.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Biden merits applause, but Zelensky should take his bows
Conventional wisdom, including my own, has it that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine will fundamentally change the world in which we live. Power will become its own raison d’etre. Geopolitics will return not only in national security strategy documents but also in the use of force. Europe will be neither whole nor free, but divided and half unfree. Democracy will need to steel itself for a long struggle with autocracy, not only in Europe but also in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.
The other, long-term scenario
But there is another possible scenario emerging, due to the courage and commitment of Ukrainians in general and President Zelensky first and foremost. Russia may taste defeat and need to retreat to heal its wounds and even change its leadership. A free and democratic Ukraine might shake off the trauma of war and re-emerge as a reformed and consolidated state. NATO might be unified as well as enlarged and Europe reinvigorated. Russia might after a while put itself on a democratric path, pay reparations to Ukraine, and return chastened to the world community.
That is a future worth hoping for. The pre-condition however is Russian defeat. Today’s collapse of the ruble, hike in interest rates, and closure of the Russian stock market are good indications.
But the short-term doesn’t look good
Putin will nevertheless double down on his effort to subdue Ukraine. He has no choice. He knows that defeat would be the end of his rule.
That is bad news in the short run for Ukrainians. Russia will lay siege to their cities, bombard civilians, and try to murder Zelensky and the rest of the governing elite. The odds of a Ukrainian win are not good.A week from now the war could look different. The resources, manpower, technology, and ruthlessness are preponderately on Moscow’s side. Moral superiority does not often win wars without those factors.
Even though Europe, the UK, and the US are doing the right things
The world’s major central banks are shutting down relations with Russia, making its massive hard currency reserves inaccessible. Europe has sanctioned Putin and agreed to limit SWIFT transactions of Russians banks. Germany has not only raised its defense spending but is also allowing transfer of weapons to Ukraine. The US and UK have orchestrated pre-emptive use of intelligence as well as dramatic financial sanctions. NATO is strengthening deployments in its eastern-most members.
This is a sterling performance of solidarity in defense of a democratic government.
Biden deserves a lot of credit
President Biden merits credit for much of this Western solidariety. He took his eye off the ball and botched Afghanistan. Ukraine is an entirely different story. Often leading from behind and allowing the Europeans to look good, Biden has managed this crisis well.
I dread to think what might have happened if Trump had still been president. His bozotic praise for Putin and fake bravado could well have taken this crisis off the rails. None of the Republicans criticizing the Administration for not doing more faster against Putin have given a moment’s thought to what is required to keep the Europeans on board and get them out front.
Biden deserves applause tomorrow night when he gives his State of the Union address. But I hope to see the day President Zelensky can take his bows.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, February 27
– Germany approves sending weapons to Ukraine.
– Europe agrees to Swift sanction.
– Slate has as good list of additional possible sanctions.
– Russian infantry now attacking Kharkiv
But note these reports on Saturday from a friend whose client has business interests in Ukraine:
Attacks Around Ukraine – “Indiscriminate shelling by cruise missiles and various range rockets continues throughout northern and western Ukraine. These attacks are not supported by ground forces. The one exception is Kharkiv. Kharkiv, once a Ukrainian capital, is under air and ground attack from numerous directions as is Kyiv. The attacks on Kharkiv have been beaten off by a combination of military and volunteer forces and since mid-day yesterday the Russians have been shelling Kharkiv suburbs with no military significance. Civilian deaths have now been reported from all parts of Ukraine and currently exceed 300. Military deaths are now reported at around 400.”
Minimal commitment of Russian infantry. Russia has not been able to control air, due to a combination of skilled Ukrainian pilots, SA-2 anti-aircraft missiles that date back to Soviet times, and the apparent deployment of AWACS planes under NATO command, with the capability of jamming Russian tactical communications, both air and ground, and aircraft targeting and navigation equipment. They are flying over Polish and Romanian territory. Their jamming equipment has a radius of over 450 miles (725KM), allowing the AWACS to cover the entire Ukrainian airspace from a stand-off position. With no commitment of infantry and limited ability to control the air, it appears that Russia is relying on missile strikes launched from Russia and Belarus against civilian targets inside Ukraine, like this example, trying to intimidate Ukrainians into pressuring the Government into peace negotiations
Market Vendors – The street market vendors in our neighborhood of Kyiv are emptying bottles of beer on the street, and then they give the empties to others to fill the empties with gasoline for Molotov Cocktails.
Drone Strike – Earlier today, one of Ukraine’s Turkish-made drones took out an entire Russian re-supply column, including supplies of gasoline, ammunition, and food.
Logistics – Logistics seems to be a major Russian weakness. They have little or no experience in re-supply. The 2008 invasion of Georgia lasted 4 days, and Russia had complete control of Georgian airspace. In Georgia, re-supply was not a problem. It is likely that Russia assumed that the invasion of Ukraine would take only a few days, and therefore re-supply wouldn’t be a problem. It appears that Russian forces are in danger of running out of fuel and ammunition. As for food, there were reports that when they were in Belarus, before the Ukraine invasion started, Russian troops were not being fed, and they had to buy food on their own, or forage.
Ground Attacks – “For example, the fighting near my home consisted of a breakthrough of one tank and two armored personnel carriers coming in from the north at 2 am. Prior to their arrival a cruise missile hit a military academy about two kilometers away. The column was coming in after the missile. They were stopped and destroyed with anti-tank weaponry. Two soldiers got away and they were killed by small arms fire. From start to finish about two hours.”
Little or no infantry support. It seems as if Russia doesn’t want to commit infantry into an urban setting, leaving armor open to attacks from Ukrainians firing anti-tank missiles from hidden positions.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The Russians are hell-bent on war crimes
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has slowed and perhaps even stalled. Ukrainian forces have proven tougher than expected. President Putin Friday appealed for negotiations, encouraged a coup, and yesterday mobilized Russia’s nuclear forces. These are signs he wants the fighting to stop. Moscow has agreed to talks today at the Belarusan border without preconditions. President Zelensky has concurred too, but he is still sounding feisty:
I need ammunition, not a ride.
Outcome uncertain
Russia is favored in resources, manpower, technology, and geography. Putin appears willing to pay whatever price for victory. The question is whether his own administration will permit it. The Russian home front is restive. The anti-war demonstrators won’t be the only ones who oppose him. Inside the Russian security forces there will be general officers unhappy with sacrifice of the army’s resources and capabilities. Putin has presumably coup-proofed himself, just as he has sanctions-proofed the Russian economy. But the protection that affords will not be 100%.
The plywood curtain
No one can predict, however, when Russia will give up on the occupation of Ukraine. It took years in Afghanistan for the mujahadeen to convince Moscow to withdraw. The talks today are unlikely to produce what Kyiv will require: complete withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine’s territory, including Donbas and Crimea.
In the meanwhile, a new curtain will descend in Europe. The newly drawn line will divide democracies from Russian-controlled autocracies. It won’t be an Iron Curtain. More like a plywood one. Strong, but not unbreakable. Europe “whole and free” will remain a Western mantra. It will not however be a serious proposition so long as Putin or someone of his ilk governs in Moscow.
Belarus and occupied Ukraine as well as Kazakhstan, the other ‘stans, Armenia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia, and at least part of Moldova will be behind the plywood curtain. The question mark will be in the Balkans. Will Serbia choose to remain on the Russian side? Or will it find ways and means to become a serious pro-EU state? So long as Milorad Dodik rules de facto in the Serb 49% (by area) of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sarajevo will not be able to do what most of its population wants: side with the West.
The rest of the world has decisions to make too
China, India, and the United Arab Emirates abstained in the UN Security Council vote on a resolution denouncing Russian aggression. China will try to walk the fine line: against NATO membership for Ukraine but favorable to an (still imaginary) negotiated settlement. India is trying to stay neutral, which amounts to tacit support for Russia.
The UAE made a big mistake. No small country without the means to defend itself militarily against its big neighbors should be siding with Russia. That applies also to Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and Oman. Saudi Arabia’s autocracy is laying low for now, enjoying $100/barrel oil. Turkey and Israel have spoken out, but the latter worries about its relations with Russia in Syria as well as the relatives of its Russian-origin citizens still inside Russia. Zelensky has called for Israeli mediation.
The Germans have made theirs
The Germans took a big step yesterday: they will transfer Stinger anti-aircraft weapons and anti-tank weapons to Ukraine and allowing other countries to transfer German weapons. They have also reversed their postion on shutting the interbank payments system (SWIFT) to some Russian entities. These are major steps that betoken how dramatically the Russian invasion has unified and emboldened NATO.
But Moscow is hell-bent on war crimes
The invasion itself is a war crime. In addition, Moscow is trying to encircle Ukraine’s main cities and getting ready to bombard them. Siege is also a war crime, as it targets not only military objectives but also civilian ones. But it is up to the UN Security Council to decide whether aggression has taken place or to refer Russia to the International Criminal Court. The Russians won’t miss their opportunities to veto.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine is an exercise in raw power. It aims to replace a democratically elected government with a puppet regime answerable to Moscow. Putin will stop only if compelled either by domestic pressures or military defeat. The Russians are hell-bent on committing war crimes.
PS: Zelensky does have panache, or at least he did in 2006 when he won the Ukrainian Dancing with the Stars:
PSS: Then there is this too, which I wouldn’t call panache, but it takes balls and I’m sure Putin couldn’t manage it:
RSS - Posts
