Yes OK Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, is embarked on a dangerous game of political brinks against Ukraine, it is also true that it has succeeded in calling into question the strength of NATO’s commitment to that country, highlighting its internal divisions and forcing the world to pay more attention to Russian power (and it is still possible that it will manage to obtain concessions from the US). US and NATO). But he also risks being forced to launch an invasion of Ukraine, which would be costly in material and political terms.
(Also read: Analysis: What is at stake in Ukraine for the future of Europe).
Halting NATO expansion has been one of the Kremlin’s main foreign policy goals for a decade, but Putin’s approach achieved little. Russia’s aggression against Ukraine since 2014 only made it more attractive for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO.
Furthermore, Russian actions failed to prevent other smaller candidate countries from joining the Alliance: Montenegro and North Macedonia joined in 2017 and 2020, respectively. Worse yet, Putin’s bellicose foreign policy led mainstream party politicians in neutral countries like Sweden and Finland to seriously consider joining NATO.
The escalation of tensions over Ukraine also poses enormous internal risks for Putin. While the Kremlin’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and intervention in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine required little sacrifice and massively increased Putin’s local political support, invading eastern Ukraine is unlikely to generate a similar political dividend. , as opinion polls in Russia have long shown little popular support for such a move: only a quarter of Russians are currently in favor of incorporating Donbas into Russia. Furthermore, the likely costs to Russia of that invasion are higher today than they were in 2014.
(We recommend: Why is Europe in a ‘unique situation’ to control covid-19?).
The significant loss of troops it would lead to a change in public opinion, and harsh Western sanctions would further damage the Russian economy. Given those political and economic risks, what does Putin hope to gain by cornering himself?
Despite his repeated assertions about the threat to Russia posed by NATO, Putin may see the current standoff as a way of demonstrating to Ukraine and other Eastern European states that NATO and US commitments are, in actually quite weak. US President Joe Biden arguably reinforced this impression in his January 19 conference, when he seemed to suggest that a “minor incursion” by Russia into Ukraine would result in a milder Western response than a full-blown invasion. country scale (Biden and other government officials were quick to deny this later).
Russia gains from such blunders, because the Kremlin obviously wants to sow discord and highlight the fissures between NATO members. Which is not new. In the days leading up to the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, Ukraine submitted a letter to Germany and France asking both countries for their support in joining the Alliance, but then French Prime Minister François Fillon emphasized the his country’s opposition to Ukraine (and Georgia) joining it.
(It may interest you: the US says that Russia is preparing fake videos to attack Ukraine)
“We don’t think this is the right answer to the balance of power in Europe, and between Europe and Russia, and we want to have a dialogue with Russia on this issue,” Fillon said. And the German foreign minister at the time, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, expressed a similar opinion.
At a time when American and European leaders would rather deal with the rise of China and the Covid-19 pandemic, Putin has made real gains by exposing the disarray of the West and the weakness of its engagement with Ukraine.
If US and European negotiators grant concessions, even token ones, Putin can use them to burnish his image. Even if he de-escalates tensions without the written guarantees he wanted.
But Putin’s risky Ukraine-linked policies remain dangerous. It is to be hoped that when American and Russian officials return to the negotiating table they will find a way to prevent a manufactured crisis from becoming an armed conflict.
HILARY APPEL
AND JENNIFER TAW (**)
Project Syndicate.
Claremont (California).
Professor of Government and Director of the Keck Center for International and Strategic Studies at Claremont McKenna College.
(**) Former analyst at RAND Corporation and professor of Government at Claremont McKenna College.
Other news In Depth
– NATO warns of the great Russian military deployment also in Belarus
#Putins #dangerous #bet #won