Category: Uncategorized
Time is running out but it is not over yet
President Putin has four objectives in deploying Russian troops to Ukraine’s borders:
- Get the US to pay attention to him and his demands.
- Prevent Ukraine from ever joining NATO.
- Split the Alliance.
- Distract domestic attention from his economic failures and corrupt behavior.
How is he doing?
US attention
He has succeeded in getting US attention. Washington and Moscow are now exchanging papers addressing European security issues. That’s good from Putin’s perspective, as he regards Russia and the US as first-rank powers. Everyone else in Europe is a bit player. The Russians have succeeded in setting part of the agenda for bilateral talks. For Putin, that signals the return of Russia to great power status.
But it also alerts the US and Europe to Russia’s broader objectives. Moscow seeks to reverse 30 years of eastward movement of Western democracy and values. It wants a neutralized sphere of influence surrounding Russia. Its neighbors should present no models of successful governance that might inspire rebellion inside the Russian Federation. We used to call such states “satellites.”
Ukraine NATO membership
On Ukrainian membership in NATO, the results so far (and likely in the future) are mixed. Many NATO members are more reluctant to consider Ukraine for membership with a Russian invasion force now poised on Kiev’s borders. NATO defense of Ukraine would not be an easy task. But the Ukrainian population, at least those not under Russian rule in Donbas and Crimea, has become far more pro-NATO. Ukraine will not get membership anytime soon. But it will be coordinating its defense plans with the Alliance for at least a generation to come, unless Moscow were to be successful in again installing a puppet regime in Kiev.
Splitting the Alliance
Alliance members are not opening their arms to Ukrainian membership, but they are lining up solidly in favor of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The only visible split in the Alliance is Germany’s reluctance to allow arms it manufactures to be transferred to Ukraine from third countries. This is a product of German internal politics. The Berlin government, which includes parties friendly to Russia and reluctant about arms trade, also fears war will interfere with putting the Nordstream 2 pipeline from Russia into operation. Nordstream 2 is vital to German’s future gas supplies and its ability to meet climate change goals. Washington has explicitly said an invasion would end the hopes of bringing Nordstream 2 on line.
Despite the German reservations, the Alliance has held together pretty well. If there is a major Russian intervention, Putin can anticipate a firm response focused on economic sanctions. His best bet for splitting the Alliance is a more modest intervention. As President Biden inopportunely said in his last press conference, the Alliance would then face dissension on the strength of the sanctions. A Russian push along the coast of the Sea of Azov towards Crimea could both gain territory and split the Alliance.
Domestic politics
Putin needs some sort of military move to distract domestic attention. Russians aren’t supportive of war against Ukraine, but Putin hopes they will rally around the flag if an intervention is successful. What Putin needs to worry about domestically is not war but failure. If he moves on Mariulpol but is not be able to take it, Russians could turn on him, especially if he gets a lot of young men killed. Putin will use “hybrid war” maneuvers to increase the odds of military success. Among his options are protests and bombings throughout Ukraine, cyberattacks on vital infrastructure, financial manipulation against the Ukrainian hryvnia, and massive propaganda about Ukrainian malfeasance.
Time is running out, but it’s not over yet
There is little visible progress in the diplomacy, but the Russians are still hesitating. They won’t want to keep their troops mobilized and ready for an invasion too long. It’s expensive, tiring for the troops, and logistically challenging. The Americans say they are trying to given the Russians an “off ramp.” But there is little they can do to satisfy Putin’s demand for a legally binding commitment that Ukraine will never join NATO. Nor will they want to reverse NATO’s three decades of expansion eastward.
The main question now is whether deterrence will work. Has the West done enough to ensure doubt about whether Russia will win a war with Ukraine? Is the prospect of sanctions sufficiently daunting for Moscow to prefer standing down? Can Putin back down without suffering serious domestic political consequences?
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What Macron meant to say
President Macron of France said Wednesday that the countries of the Western Balkans should be given a clear perspective on joining the EU within a reasonable timeframe. France has been reluctant on enlargement. So the press in the countries concerned has highlighted the statement and wondered what it means.
My guess is less than many might hope. Macron omitted the when, where, and how.
Macron also underlined on the same day that European culture evolved through Christianity:
But we come from Ancient Greece to the Roman Empire, from Christianity to the Renaissance and to the Enlightenment, heirs of a singular way of envisaging the human adventure.
https://presidence-francaise.consilium.europa.eu/en/news/french-president-emmanuel-macron-s-speech-at-the-european-parliament-strasbourg-19-january-2022/
He makes no mention of Europe’s considerable debt to the Islamic world. That casts a shadow on any hope Macron’s statement applies to the three Muslim-majority countries of the Western Balkans: Albania, Kosovo, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. All three are already laggards in adoption of the acquis communautaire compared to Serbia, Montenegro, and North Macedonia.
Macron could have signalled openness to their EU accession. Kosovo has fulfilled the hundred or so requirements the EU levied as preconditions for the visa waiver. France has blocked it, making Kosovars the only Balkanites who need visas to enter the EU. Albania is awaiting a date to start its accession negotiations. Macron might have promised that. He didn’t.
My guess is that the excitement over Macron’s “opening” to the Western Balkans is unjustified. If France does anything to fulfill Macron’s promise, it will accelerate Serbia’s accession and perhaps Montenegro’s. They are both Christian-majority. This would be little more than continuation of longstanding French policy, which favors Belgrade’s interests over those of other Western Balkan countries. Liberté, égalité, fraternité for Christians is what Macron meant to say.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, December 17
– AIPAC will launch its first campaign donation arm.-
– Remember, NDAA doesn’t provide money. Appropriations needed.
-David Ignatius urges use of IAEA to pressure Iran.
– Revolutionary Guard budget to more than double.
– Russia has a negotiation package.
Good reads: Reimagining Arms Control. Prof Brands says US is preparing for wrong war with China.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to 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:
Stevenson’s army, November 24
-CNN says US is putting troops near Ethiopia … in case.
– Taliban is sending troops to fight Islamic State.
– FP notes critics of some invitees to summit of democracies.
– China is mad that Taiwan was invited.
– Germany is about to have a new government.
– Lobbyists are using their Hill townhouses.
Politico reports that Susan Rice demands well-written memos, including no typos and the Oxford comma. [This is a valuable lesson for all govt employees.]
History lesson: Atlantic tells what happened 100 years ago when lawmakers tried to ban the teaching of … evolution.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to 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:
A necessary and unavoidable but constructive failure
The UN’s Climate Change Conference of Parties (COP 26) ended yesterday with a lengthy, consensus declaration. The Glasgow Climate Pact includes something for just about everyone and not enough for anyone. That’s what you expect from a consensus document purporting to represent the views of 197 countries that are collectively fouling the global commons. Nor is it surprising that the current commitments of the parties, despite significant strengthening before and during the conference, will not achieve the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees centigrade.
The implications are dire. At higher temperatures than that goal, global warming will raise sea levels enough to drown some island countries and deprive many others of their current coastlines, generate even more dramatic storms and forest fires than we are already seeing, shift agricultural patterns in ways that hinder growing enough to meet global demand, and make parts of the planet even more uninhabitable than they already are. The costs will be astronomical. The human implications tragic. There is nothing to celebrate about COP 26 if you are looking only at the physical implications of what was decided in Glasgow, even if you welcome the substantial agreements reached on methane and deforestation.
The conference was however a success in another sense: without it, things would have been worse. Glasgow upped the ante on climate change. No government on earth can now ignore it entirely. Even laggards like China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and India have been announcing new goals and counter measures. President Biden has put climate change high on his agenda, reversing President Trump’s foolish and counterproductive effort to ignore it. Island nations whose physical existence is threatened had their voices magnified. Less developed countries had their needs acknowledged, if not yet fully funded. None of this is enough, but much of it would not have happened without Glasgow.
This is typical of large international conferences. The UN is doing what it can and should. Such conferences serve to mobilize public opinion and shift attitudes, even if they fail to solve the problems they aim to solve. The key now is to maintain the momentum and raise the political pressure. The parties have agreed to meet again next year in Egypt, where no doubt the appeals for action and money will be heightened. Expanding economies in what we can hope will be the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic will likely make the prospects for meeting the goal of 1.5 degrees centigrade even dimmer than they are today. Don’t expect good news, but next year’s conference will again be a necessary, unavoidable but constructive failure.
That’s how the international system works. Get used to it. This is going to go on for decades.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 27
I’ve been traveling and negligent about publishing Charlie’s daily take, but I’ll try to do better this week:
– Erdogan defends military purchases from Russia.
– Chinese unsettled by hostage release deal.
-US Supreme Court sees sharp drop in favorability.
– WSJ says US failed to build sustainable economy in Afghanistan.
– WaPo explains failure of Afghan security forces.
– Guardian profiles Jake Sullivan.
And while this is not a prediction, Steven Dennis of Bloomberg describes the way legislative fights often work out:
“How deals sometimes come together in Congress
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES TO BUDGET MODS IMMEDIATELY DIS NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES TO FRAMEWORK NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES”
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to 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).
RSS - Posts
