Tag: Finland
Stevenson’s army, May 14
– Erdogan signals opposition to NATO membership for FInland and Sweden, which requires unanimity.
– CNN says IC is reviewing failure — except by State’s INR — to foresee strength of Ukrainian resistance.
– WaPo says US may have violated promise against 3d country transfer of Russian aircraft.
– WSJ says US has cut some Syria sanctions.
– Macron wants Zelensky to make concessions.
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).
Stevenson’s army, May 12
– Russia sees that as a threat.
– Task & Purpose says Russia isn’t good at info war.
– 57 GOP voted against Ukraine aid in House.
-WaPo reports limits on intelligence sharing with Ukraine.
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).
Stevenson’s army, April 26
– Gen Milley says time is not on Ukraine’s side.
– US will re-fill allies who ship to Ukraine.
– Reuters reports Finland and Sweden will seek to join NATO next month.
– Axios has Big Facts on defense spending worldwide.
– WSJ says Russia is hiding economic data.
– Yes, Macron won but big test in June in parliamentary elections.
– Also good news in Slovenia.
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).
Russia is losing the war even when it wins
The Russians have now adjusted their aggression in Ukraine. They have abandoned for now the homicidal but fruitless assault on Kyiv. Instead they are now focused on enlarging the areas they already controlled in Donbas and ensuring a land bridge to Crimea along the coast of the Sea of Azov. They also continue to bombard Ukrainian cities, including Kharkiv, Kyiv, and Lviv.
This new war plan makes far more sense than the original one. The areas in question are contiguous to territory Moscow already controls. The limited objectives are commensurate with the forces Moscow has available. Russian speakers inhabit much of the coastline in question, though by now most of them have fled westward.
The Russians are gaining ground but at high cost
The Russian assault has gained some ground in the east and south. But the effort is ponderous and costly. They have lost eight generals. If the ratio of generals to troops is the same in Ukraine as in the Russian army, that likely means they have lost at least 15-20,000 troops (killed) plus wounded and exhausted. But generals are harder to kill than soldiers, so that number may be low. It is roughly consistent with NATO’s guesstimate.
The Russian gains are coming at high cost not only in manpower but also in Ukrainian infrastructure. The Russians are leveling not only power and water plants but large numbers of apartments and businesses, especially in besieged Mariupol. If you are planning to occupy territory, destroying its civilian infrastructure is not so smart. Murdering and raping the locals is also not a good idea, as they are not likely to take mistreatment lightly. But that is precisely what the Russian forces retreating from north of Kyiv did.
The strategic outcome is no longer in doubt
These tactical mistakes compound the strategic ones. Ukraine will not be a friend to Russia in the future. When the people you are liberating flee away from your army, you are doing something wrong. If all, or more likely part, of Ukraine is occupied, the population will resist. Putin doubted that Ukrainian national identity is real, but Ukrainians no longer do. They are standing up to defend their country’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. That is a big strategic loss for Russia.
Any territory the Russians occupy will remain unreconstructed, as the West won’t pay and the Russians won’t have the money. Colin Powell’s antique store dictum (“you break it, you buy it”) will saddle Moscow will an enormous burden. Russia doesn’t even have the kind of excess population required to re-populate any parts of Ukraine it occupies. China, which has both the money and the population, will be far more interested in economically penetrating the European Union than supporting a costly Russian satrapy in Donbas.
The geopolitical situation looks no better. Russian aggression has brought strengthened NATO forces to its eastern members, all of whom now understand the risks they run if Moscow succeeds in Ukraine. They are funneling arms and training to the Ukrainians. Finland and Sweden are readying membership applications for the Alliance. Russian threats against them as well as the Baltics, Poland, and other NATO members for supplying weapons to Ukraine are falling on deaf ears. Republicans in the US Congress are muting their Russophilia. Even Turkey is sympathetic with Ukraine. NATO hasn’t been this unified since the Cold War.
Russia’s interests and Putin’s are diverging
Russia needs an end to this war, sooner rather than later. It can’t do that by continuing the fight, which will prolong the agony. But Putin’s interests are not the same as Russia’s. He likely can’t survive in power if Russians conclude the war was lost or that it was a colossal mistake. Hence the massive repression Putin is exercising inside Russia, which has lost all pretence of democratic norms. Putin often says Russia is fighting Nazis in Ukraine, but his own behavior now resembles Hitler’s far more than Ukrainian President Zelensky’s.
Russian aggression in Ukraine was ill-conceived and ill-executed. But so long as Putin is in charge, it will continue. Only if there is a serious threat to his hold on power will he reconsider. President Biden’s references to Putin as a genocidal war criminal are intended to signal US readiness to support an alternative. The Russian security elite, Putin’s oligarchs, and the Russian people have however so far failed to mount a serious effort against him. But that is not to say they never will. Some day they may conclude the obvious: Russia is losing the war even when it is winning.
Stevenson’s army, April 14
The Pulitzer Prizes for 2021 will be announced May 9. Already I’m seeing excellent reporting that might win a year from now.
– WSJ today has two big stories — how NATO training has helped Ukraine and increased intelligence sharing with Ukraine.
– A Politico newsletter says Jake Sullivan has recruited a “nest of China hawks” at NSC.
– Wired tells how hackers have disclosed details about Russians.
– Tom Friedman has a good interview with John Arquilla.
– Russia’s Black Sea flagship has been damaged and evacuated.
– Politico reports complaints about yesterday’s Human Rights report.
– Marine Le Pen wants to reduce French role in NATO, questions aid to Ukraine.
– Russia warns against Finland and Sweden joining NATO.
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).
Peace picks, November 21-25
- The American Moment in the Middle East from Eisenhower to Trump |Monday, November 21 | 11:45am – 1:30pm | Hudson Institute | Click HERE to RegisterWith the election of a new president and significant foreign policy decisions on the line, one of the best ways to understand the stakes involved is to revisit the past. With the Middle East, there is no better place to start than with Dwight Eisenhower, the incisive leader who helped win World War II and formulated America’s Cold War policy. But according to Hudson Senior Fellow Michael Doran in his critically acclaimed new book, Ike’s Gamble, Eisenhower stumbled repeatedly in the Middle East before he got it right.
Eisenhower, in Doran’s account, initially made the same kinds of mistakes that President Barack Obama has made. Both believed America had tilted too closely to Israel and sought to readjust the balance—Obama by realigning with Iran, and Eisenhower by allying with Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser. The difference, argues Doran, is that Eisenhower came to realize he was wrong to turn against America’s traditional Middle East allies and he eventually restored the status quo. Obama, however, leaves the White House with America’s position in the Middle East still unsettled. Will Donald Trump be able to repair Middle Eastern relations, or will he indulge isolationist tendencies and further cede America’s status in the region? Given the extent of Eisenhower’s engagement in the region, what other lessons can the next administration draw from his experience?
Join us at Hudson Institute on November 21 as panelists Michael Doran, Hudson Distinguished Fellow Walter Russell Mead, and Council on Foreign Relations Fellow Ray Takeyh discuss Eisenhower’s strategy and the incoming administration’s policy options in the Middle East. This lunchtime panel will be moderated by Hudson Senior Fellow Lee Smith. - Real Security: Governance and Stability in the Arab World | Monday, November 21 | 3:00pm – 4:30pm | Brookings Institution | Click HERE to RegisterThe breakdown of regional order in the Middle East was driven by domestic crises in the relationship between Arab citizens and their governments, but the resulting disorder has unleashed civil violence, sectarian and ethnic conflict, and fierce geopolitical competition. What is the relationship between the region’s power politics and the breakdown in the Arab social contract? What does the collapse of Arab governance tell us about the requisites for lasting stability in the Middle East? And what role can outside powers, especially the United States, play in helping the region move toward more sustainable governance?
On November 21, the Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East at the Atlantic Council and the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings will launch a report on this topic written by Tamara Cofman Wittes: “Real Security: The Interdependence of Governance and Stability in the Arab World.” The report was commissioned by the Atlantic Council’s Middle East Strategy Task Force (MEST), co-chaired by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. To discuss the report, they will be joined by Amr Hamzawy, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. - Ambassador Series: Ambassador of Finland, H.E. Kristi Kauppi | Tuesday, November 22 | 6:00pm – 8:00pm | World Affairs Institute at the Ronald Reagan Building | Email to RegisterPlease join the World Affairs Council-Washington, DC as we host Her Excellency Kirsti Kauppi, Ambassador of Finland to the United States. She will address the US – Finland bi-lateral relationship, the country’s approaching centennial, Finland’s climate change research in the Arctic, and its relationship with Russia.
Ambassador Kauppi took up her post in Washington in September 2015. She has over 30 years of experience in foreign policy. She previously served as advisor to the Finnish State Secretary and head of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy coordination in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in Helsinki. Her previous diplomatic postings include Permanent Representative to the UN-related international organizations located in Vienna, where she served for three years as the Finnish Governor in the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors.