GEOPOLITICAL GENIUS? — We might be overestimating Vladimir Putin. That’s what two former ambassadors to Ukraine told Nightly this week as the world waits to learn whether the Russian president will begin the largest war in Europe since the 1940s. Despite the widespread sentiment that Putin has the West playing by his rules, the Russian president doesn’t seem to understand Ukraine too well, said William Taylor, a former ambassador to Ukraine and the vice president of Russia and Europe at the U.S. Institute of Peace. “He thinks that if anybody speaks Russian, they’re going to be supporting him and Russia. Turns out, Mr. Putin, that’s not the case,” said Taylor, who served as ambassador from 2006 to 2009 and again as acting ambassador from 2019 to 2020. “In particular, since Russians invaded Ukraine in 2014, the Ukrainian people, no matter if they speak Russian, Ukrainian, Hungarian, or German, they hate President Putin.” Ukrainians’ feelings toward Putin won’t do much to stop a potential invasion, one that U.S. military and intelligence assessments suggest could leave up to 50,000 civilians dead or wounded, lead to the collapse of Kyiv within days and spur a humanitarian crisis with up to 5 million refugees. “As of this moment, I am convinced he has made the decision,” to invade Ukraine, President Joe Biden said today, citing “significant intelligence capability” for his assessment. But if Putin thinks this level of catastrophe will do anything to change Ukraine’s perception of Russia, it’s a “massive fail,” said Steven Pifer, a former ambassador to Ukraine from 1998 to 2000 and now a William J. Perry fellow at Stanford. The nearly-200,000 troops lined up for an attack, Pifer said, have galvanized NATO and increased the West’s support for Kyiv. “It’s a huge miscalculation,” Pifer said. Not only have NATO and Europe stuck together, but also Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky hasn’t blinked — likely surprising Putin, Taylor said. Now the Russian president is faced with a choice: back down, agree to the proposals on the table and appear weak, Pifer said, or invade and accept a costly war. The war would be devastating for Ukraine, Taylor said. The U.S. assesses that Russia has between 169,000 and 190,000 personnel in and near Ukraine, including troops on the border, in Belarus, occupied Crimea and other Russian-led forces in eastern Ukraine. Western officials are warning that new provocations and shellings in eastern Ukraine’s breakway regions mean Putin could use the violence as a pretext to launch an attack. “My biggest concern is the number of Ukrainians that will be killed, and it’s gonna be military and civilian. The Russians have the capabilities,” Taylor said, from ballistic missiles and aircrafts to naval ship mounted artillery and missiles. “I’ve got a lot of friends there, and I worry about that.” To understand the current moment, we have to look at Putin’s choices over the last decade in particular, Pifer said. While Putin’s policies have long alienated Ukraine, his actions in 2014 hardened Ukrainians’ anti-Russia sentiments, he said. Russia invaded and annexed Crimea and threw its support behind conflict in Ukraine’s Donbas region soon after. The fighting, which began more than seven years ago, has killed more than 14,000 people. Now 62 percent of Ukrainians support their country joining NATO, the highest percentage since 2014, according to Rating, a Ukrainian polling agency. Given NATO’s unwillingness to agree to further enlargement right now, it’s sort of a non-issue, Pifer said. But the figure does reflect Ukraine’s shift in attitude — and the unlikely prospect that Russia would be able to exert the kind of influence over Kyiv that it wants any time soon, Pifer said. Putin is misjudging the ability of his military to invade at a relatively low cost, Pifer said, and he’s likely underestimating the degree of resistance he’ll face from Ukrainians. “I was there two weeks ago,” Pifer said. “And people are basically saying if the Russians come, I’m going to get a gun.” Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. A programming note: We’ll be off this Monday, Feb. 21, for President’s Day. But we’ll be back and better than ever Tuesday, Feb. 22. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@politico.com. Or contact tonight’s author at mward@politico.com, or on Twitter at @MyahWard.
|
AS IF THERE WASN’T ENOUGH GOING ON — The Munich Security Conference, the annual gathering of powerful decision-makers, can add one more event to its agenda this weekend: the Iran nuclear talks. As officials signal an agreement may be nearing, European nuclear negotiators are expected to travel to Munich this weekend to keep talks going during the conference over reviving the Iran nuclear deal, which limited Tehran’s nuclear ambitions in exchange for broad sanctions relief, Stephanie Liechtenstein writes. Also attending will be Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian and senior U.S. officials like Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Vice President Kamala Harris. Meanwhile, other delegations will stay behind in Vienna, where talks have been ongoing for months. There, diplomats will continue the formal discussions, not wanting to risk any interruption as negotiators reach the precipice of a potential deal. Enrique Mora, the senior EU official responsible for coordinating and overseeing the talks, will keep working on what officials hope will be the final text of a deal. He’ll be joined in Vienna by Iran’s chief negotiator, top Russian and Chinese negotiators, as well as U.S. Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley, according to one senior Western official with direct knowledge of the matter. Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here. |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.