peacefare.net

Russians are weakening but Ukrainians need more help

President Putin today repeated the lie that he started the war in Ukraine to prevent a Nazi attack on Russia and Russians. Foreign Minister Lavrov was telling the internationals that negotiations might produce results. The Russian army is recruiting fighters from Syria and the appealing for military help from China. All these are signs of Russian weakness.

Putin has failed to convince the Russians

Most important is Putin’s continuing need to repeat his false justifications for war. Calling the Jewish President of Ukraine a Nazi is unconvincing to you and me. But Putin knows how much his citizens, with good historical reason, hate anyone labelled a Nazi. He has also tightened control over the Russian media. Many Russians may not know or believe Zelensky is not only Jewish but a native Russian speaker. Zelensky broke into Russian speaking to the US Congress today when appealing to Russia’s citizens to end the war.

Putin has failed to convince many Russians that the war is justified. The demonstrations against it have not been massive, but they are not tiny either. People who attend them risk serious penalties. The Russian “justice” system can impose penalties of up to 15 years just for calling the “special operation” a war.

Lavrov has failed to convince the international community

Lavrov is telling the internationals a compromise on Russian terms is possible. This is the same liar who denied Russia had any plans to invade Ukraine. He has even said that it has not done so. He is not at all credible. Russian demands have remained the same. Moscow wants a demilitarized and neutral Ukraine that can never join NATO as well as slices of Ukrainian territory. These the Russians want to include not only Crimea and the parts of Donbas their proxies already controlled before the invasion. None of those propositions is reasonable from the Ukrainian perspective.

Zelensky has admitted Ukraine will not be able to join NATO anytime soon, which is a statement of fact. Saying it out loud was presumably intended as a gesture to the Russians. They however don’t seem interested in anything less than a permanent legal guarantee. That proposition is a non-starter with Washington and most of Europe.

The Russian army is bogged down

The intended Russian blitzkrieg in Ukraine has bogged down. Logistical problems, poor planning, and lack of will to fight have reduced the Russian army to a siege force. It is shelling civilian areas, including so-called “humitarian corridors” it agreed would be safe. The Russian air force has failed to establish full dominance in the sky but continues to rain cruise missiles, smart bombs, and dumb ones.

Zelensky’s priority in his speech to Congress today was air defense. He admitted the no-fly zone he wants isn’t going to happen. But he appealed for fighter aircraft and air defenses instead. I suspect he’ll get what he is asking for, despite Pentagon resistance. The Poles and others seem ready and willing to transfer the stuff. It will put them at risk of Russian attack. President Biden will have to decide whether that risk is so great he wants to risk a Russian win in Ukraine.

The Russian appeals to Syrian fighters and Chinese military supplies are a clear sign that things are going badly on the ground in Ukraine. The Syrian fighters they can get for a song. They may not be worth much more. The Chinese military supplies are higher value. The US is opposing them vigorously. Ditto with Chinese help in evading sanctions, which may be more important. Russia today will likely default on dollar-denominated bonds. You only do that if you don’t have the hard currency required. Even if Moscow pays at the end of the 30-day grace period, creditors will be reluctant to risk a dime more on Russian official debt.

That doesn’t mean things are good for Ukraine

Russia’s problems don’t mean things are going well for Ukraine. The bombardment of its cities is taking a huge toll on property and lives. It would only take a lucky shot to kill Zelensky. The Russians are laying waste to the Ukrainian countryside. They are bogged down but inching closer to Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Odesa with every passing day. Kherson is in Russian hands. They are pulverrizing Mariupol.

But Ukrainians have demonstrated they are willing to fight. They may be losing ground, but they are not weakening. The Russians are weakening, but they started out much stronger. The best that can be said for this war is that the outcome is not yet certain. The Ukrainians will need more help.

Slam the door shut on Open Balkans

Miodrag Vlahović is the former minister of foreign affairs of Montenegro and the first Montenegrin ambassador to Washington. He is now president of Montenegrin Helsinki Committee. He writes:

Russian aggression against Ukraine has provoked a dramatic change in the Western approach to Russia. Confrontation with Russia has re-united the Euro-Atlantic community and given a new raison d’etre to NATO. It will have profound effects in the Balkans too.

The EU and US have been failing

The Balkans have endured years of futile US diplomacy and ineffective EU efforts to move all six Western Balkan countries towards EU membership. The main reason for their poor results was their effort to appease Serbia. That modus operandi was particularly present during the Trump administration. The American bottom line was simple: economy will resolve all the other issues. Karl Marx would agree.

EU diplomacy in recent years entered the murky waters of of changing borders and territorial swaps on an ethnic basis. That process failed but evolved to a vague “Open Balkans” proposition. It ignores not only the existing Berlin Process for regional co-operation, but also the regional CEFTA framework for trade. It would give leadership in the region to Serbian President Vučić and Albanian Prime Minister Rama, encouraging their Greater Serbia and, consequently, Greater Albania ambitions.

The consequences are evident

As a consequence of this ineffective diplomacy, Western Balkan countries’ advance towards EU membership has stalled. Three (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Montenegro) have expressed serious reserves concerning the logic and potential effects of Open Balkans. Pro-EU Balkan politicians and civic activists think hard-line nationalism, emanating mainly from Belgrade, has caused serious degradation of regional security and stability.

Russian hybrid activities have contributed, as they have in many Western countries, the US included. Russian media and their outlets, combined with an orchestrated round-the-clock campaign of Belgrade-controlled media, have encouraged Serbian nationalism and its allies throughout the region.

Serbia has enjoyed “privileged status” in the West for years now. The US and EU hoped to “save” Vučić from Russia’s bear hug. Appeasment from the West allowed the step-by-step takeover of Serbia from the East.

Now things should change

This appeasement of Russia’s main client in the region is no longer a viable policy.

“Open Balkans,” supported by both the State Department and the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, should end. It was leading the entire region off the EU track.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine requires prompt action in the Balkans:

• Accelerate EU membership negotiations as the first priority on the Euro-Atlantic Balkans agenda. The region should return to the “regatta principle,” that is EU accession on the merits of individual candidates.
• Provide a credible time-table for NATO accession of Kosovo as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina. The sooner, the better.
• Offer Serbia the same. Even if its internal politics and declared “neutrality” militate against NATO membership, the “open door” policy is crucial.
• Make Bosnia-Herzegovina a functioning, civic political system. Changes of election laws based on ethnic denominations will not help. The Dayton constitutional framework needs change.
• Revive the Berlin Process, especially cultural co-operation and educational programs. They are the best training for accession talks with EU.
• Promote civic and non-nationalist political forces and their leaders throughout the region.

All these measures will take time and energy. The magnitude of problems and wasted years make the task difficult. The Balkans has never been a place of easy solutions.

Open the doors to NATO and the EU

This is a time to be resolute. The Ukraine war makes delay unwise and appeasement foolish. The US and EU should slam the door shut on Open Balkans and open the doors to NATO and the EU.

Humanitarian corridors are a bad idea too, but what’s better?

I’ve already said that a no fly zone won’t fly. It risks bringing the US into direct conflict with Russia. That’s a bad idea because the escalatory ladder could end in a nuclear exchange. That would be far worse, especially for Americans, than anything happening now.

Humanitarian corridors are target-rich

Another much-ballyhooed proposal would establish humanitarian corridors for the safe evacuation of civilians from population centers. They too are not a good idea. For the Russians, any territory on which adversaries gather to evacuate is a target-rich environment. They have demonstrated unequivocally in Syria that they will attack evacuation routes. They have already done it again in Ukraine in recent days. The Red Cross has said one designated humanitarian corridor leading out of Mariupol is mined.

Far better would be an international effort to stop the shelling that gives rise to the humanitarian corridors proposal. Mariupol is under siege. The Russian army is shelling the city’s civilian areas, targeting among other things hospitals:

Das Krankenhaus mitten in Mariupol. Es hatte die größte Wöchnerinnenstation der Stadt #RussiaInvadesUkraine pic.twitter.com/wAUyDpPLif

— Alice Bota (@AliceBota) March 9, 2022

Both the siege and the shelling are war crimes. International humanitarian law permits attacks only on belligerents, not civilians, the means to supply them, or medical services.

Stopping the sieges

How to get the Russians to stop? Ideally, the Russian commanders would have refused to shell civilian areas or lay siege to population centers. They know full well those are war crimes. Since they have not seen fit to do the right thing, every Western general who knows one of them should be calling to object. Russian commanders should understand that for the rest of their lives professional soldiers will view them as war criminals, not colleagues.

That isn’t likely to work, so we come to military solutions. The Ukrainian army would break the sieges if it could. One possible move would be airdropping humanitarian supplies. This too doesn’t work well. It is hard to target them to the right people. The planes carrying the supplies are the flying equivalent of sitting ducks. They are slow. They don’t carry much. Lacking their own active defenses, they are vulnerable, especially as they descend to drop supplies.

If the Russians won’t agree to stand off, the transport planes would need to be protected. That is not a pretty picture. It is also one that could lead to direct conflict between the Russians and NATO.

Another possibility is for the Ukrainians to surrender some population centers to enhance the defense of others. That is apparently what they did at the beginning of the war when they moved air defenses from the south to Kyiv. This would risk losing more of the southern coast, including Odesa. It is not an attractive proposition. But if it were to lead to a major defeat of Russian forces aimed at besieging Kyiv it might be worth the cost. Abandoning Kyiv to enhance defense of Odesa is too risky. Once the capital is gone, defeat can’t be far off.

Only winning will save the civilians

The Ukrainians face an adversary who doesn’t care about international humanitarian law. Winning the war quickly would save the most civilians. That isn’t likely. The Russian offensive has stalled, so Putin will double down. Odds are the Russians will continue waging their war of aggression, targeting of civilians, and besieging of population centers. Humanitarian corridors are a bad idea, but what’s better?

PS: Here for your viewing pleasure is a little something about Foreign Minister Lavrov, who is supposed to be negotiating humanitarian corridors:

The real but strange superbowl is next week

The impending Russian attack on Ukraine will trigger a war for geopolitical dominance in Europe between Russia and the United States. But Washington will not be fighting with its own troops. Ukraine will get lots of help from the US and its NATO allies, but Kyiv is not a member of the Alliance and therefore not entitled to its collective defense.

Russian war plans

Russia has wisely chosen a relatively weak adversary, as it did also in Georgia in 2008. Kyiv is a bit more than 100 miles from Russia-allied Belarus (less as the crow flies), where Moscow has mounted a substantial invasion force. It would be foolhardy for Russia to try to capture Kyiv. Doing so would cause massive destruction to a city where Moscow will want to install a post-war puppet government. But a feint from the north is inevitable, to keep Ukrainian forces pinned down there. A smaller move from Moldova in the west is also likely.

In the meanwhile, Russian forces from Crimea, the rebel areas of Luhansk and Donetsk, and amphibious landing ships will aim for Mariupol and other towns along the Sea of Azov littoral. A land bridge to Crimea will be their objective. If they succeed at that, they may try to go all the way to Odesa. Cut off from the Black Sea, surrounded, and defeated, Ukrainian forces would surrender, the government would flee or fall, and Moscow would be in charge of the entire country.

The Ukrainians have a chance

None of this is inevitable. The Ukrainians may surprise the Russians with stiff resistance and newly acquired advanced weapons, including Turkish drones and American anti-tank Javelins. While surrounded, the Ukrainians have the advantage of shorter interior lines of communication. They will also be fighting on their home turf. It is anyone’s guess how many thousands of troops Putin can lose before abandoning the invasion. But it is wise to remember this:

Stalin, Peter the Great and Ivan the Terrible especially, all of whom not only both glorified the state while abusing its people, but also, literally killed (Ivan), or were involved in killing (Stalin and Peter) their own offspring. 

Once he starts, Putin will be hard to stop, no matter what the losses.

Diplomacy isn’t working yet

He is proving hard to stop even before the attack. There is no sign yet of Russian second thoughts. Moscow continues to prevaricate, saying it has no plans for an invasion of Ukraine. President Biden has done an admirable job of lining up the NATO allies. But only time will tell whether they are ready and willing to impose serious sanctions on Russia, cutting it off from the international financial system and from revenues of the Nordstream 2 natural gas pipeline.

President Biden is in a difficult spot. Americans don’t want to defend Ukraine. But in the wake of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, a Russian takeover in Kyiv will underline American weakness. Biden needs either to convince Putin not to invade Ukraine, or make the sanctions that ensue far more punishing than the usual. The pre-emptive use of intelligence on Russian false flag operations and military deployments is a clever tactic. It has made clear to Western audiences who will be at fault for the Russo-Ukrainian war. But that won’t save Biden from ferocious criticism if it happens.

This is a geopolitical contest with one adversary fighting with both hands tied behind its back, or geopolitics by proxy. The real but strange superbowl more than likely kicks off next week.