EXPERT PERSPECTIVE – What we are witnessing in Ukraine is a tragedy that, just a few months ago, many considered unthinkable – no, unimaginable: a large-scale land war on the European continent via the invasion of a neutral and peaceful country by a far-superior military power.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s order to attack Ukraine followed months of military build-up in the territory between the Russian Federation and the Union State of Belarus, under the disguise of a military exercise.
It was disheartening to watch a series of futile attempts by Western leaders who were trying to appeal to Putin to show restraint, not understanding that in Putin’s mind, the pleas only made them look weak and may have even encouraged him to move forward. Videos of the violence and the scale of combat, now in heavily populated urban areas, are horrifying.
Sadly, the situation is likely to get worse, much worse. Putin has gone all in. He is deeply committed to redressing a seemingly inexhaustible list of real or imagined wrongs heaped on Russia through the centuries. This list of grievances combined with Putin’s clearly deranged mental state makes for a very dangerous situation. You can be sure that a number of other world leaders with irredentist lists of their own, are watching closely and calculating whether this is the time for them to make their moves. Therefore, how the West deals with Putin’s assault on Ukraine a critical component to preventing escalation and expansion of this conflict from a regional one to a global one.
In the past two weeks, Putin has twice publicly – either directly or indirectly - mentioned the possibility of nuclear war. Perhaps to demonstrate his seriousness, Putin observed Russian nuclear weapons testing from a bunker in the days immediately preceding the assault on Ukraine. Russian military doctrine has integrated the use of tactical nuclear weapons in a way that western strategy has not. Sadly, the West’s response to Putin’s aggression to this point has been unimpressive and is unlikely to be a deterrent to escalation by Putin or potential action by other hostile actors around the globe.
What is on Putin’s mind?
There is merit in paying attention to what leaders like Putin say and there is oftentimes a strong correlation between what he says and what he does. On February 25, Putin described the leaders of Ukraine as “terrorists” and “a gang of drug addicts and neo-Nazis.” Keep in mine that Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskiy is Jewish. Yet, in a rambling speech the day before Putin made those comments, the Russian President was clear that his grievances go beyond Ukraine. He wants to undo what he calls, “America’s empire of lies.” He also reminded anyone who might have forgotten, that Russia “remains one of the most powerful nuclear states…with a certain advantage in several cutting edge weapons.” He threatened “consequences you have never faced in your history, to anyone who tries to interfere.” In addition to his oft-repeated grievance about broken promises by the West regarding the eastward expansion of NATO, Putin has frequently referred to what he calls the ‘illegal’ NATO bombing and intervention in the Bosnian War in 1995 when NATO forces principally targeted Russia’s ally, Serbia. But Putin’s recent focus on grievances has started to go much deeper.
In his July 2020 essay on the unity of the Ukrainian and Russian peoples, Putin refers to the Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939, together with Germany, which started World War II in Europe. He described the move as justified because it resulted in the recovery of Russian lands taken by the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the Middle Ages. More recently, and ominously, Putin has started to refer to grievances imposed on Russia by the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. This Treaty was signed in 1918, between the new Bolshevik government in Russia and the Central Powers. It ended Russia’s participation with the Allied Powers in World War I.
The terms of the treaty were harsh, and Russia ceded hegemony over Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia to Germany and territory in the south Caucasus, to the Ottoman Empire. Russia was also forced to recognize the independence of Ukraine.
The Brest Treaty would be annulled by the Treaty of Versailles in 1918, but as a consequence of those two treaties, Soviet Russia was forced to renounce Imperial Russian claims on Poland, Belarus, Ukraine and Finland, in addition to the Baltic States.
That’s a lot of history, but if that is included in the list of scores Putin wants to settle, it’s also a lot of geography and it might explain why, in the past few days, Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials have threatened “military political” action against Sweden and Finland if they proceed on a course to join NATO.
What Else Might Be in Play?
As the Russian assault on Ukraine continues, Russian shelling and missile strikes have landed disturbingly close to the Polish-Ukrainian border. Given the tensions in recent months between Belarus and Poland, it would not be surprising if Russian forces intentionally “misfired” rockets to strike targets in Poland.
Poland’s government has been on the frontline of providing support to Ukraine and in calling for much harsher sanctions on Russia. There is no love lost between Poland and Russia and the Poles might well respond with counter-fire should such an incident occur. Would an escalation like that constitute grounds to invoke Article V of the NATO Treaty which would allow for collective defense of a NATO country?
In conflict zones, “mistakes” happen. Overly enthusiastic or under trained troops can easily misinterpret “Commander’s Intent” with tragic consequences (think MH-17). But without strong escalation management protocols, one of these incidents could draw a military response and before you know it, the war has expanded.
And then there is the possibility of an incident at sea. Drawing back from the risk of a gradually expanding conflict in Eastern Europe, one wonders if the Serbian nationalists who harbor the same resentment expressed by Putin of territory lost in the Balkan’s Wars in the 1990s, coupled with simmering centuries-old ethnic and religious hatreds, might feel that this is time to redress those grievances, too. In his current frame of mind, Putin would be highly likely to support such an effort. Recent comments by Syrian leaders on Russia’s attack of Ukraine are worth a look.
Changing focus from Europe, one wonders if the Ukraine conflict has changed the calculus of Iran’s leaders regarding their nuclear program. Despite reports of progress in restoring the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and Iran’s clear wish to capitalize on crude prices above $100bbl, might Iran not also calculate that the chances of an Israeli/US strike on their nuclear facilities may be minimal - with US forces committed to supporting NATO on the flanks of the conflict in Ukraine? For its part, North Korea, which just launched a ballistic missile into this sea this weekend, following in a series of missile tests of various types over the past several weeks. Might Kim Jong-Un think this is a good time to conduct another nuclear test?
Lastly, there is China and Taiwan. There were many ominous notes from Putin and Xi’s last meeting in Beijing for the opening of the Olympic Games, but high on the list, were China’s acknowledgement and support for the legitimacy of Putin’s “security guarantee” demands and Russia’s expression of support for Chinese territorial claims in southeast Asia, the South China Sea, and unification with Taiwan.
In recent weeks, as the world focused on the Russian military build-up along Ukraine's border, Chinese air incursions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone also increased as has the hostile rhetoric directed at Taiwan in Chinese media. On February 11, the White House released a new strategy document regarding the Asia-Pacific theater that includes more diplomatic, political, economic, and military support for Taiwan.
This document cannot have pleased Beijing. One wonders if the US and its allies are obliged to redeploy naval assets from the Pacific Theater to support operations in the Atlantic, Baltic or Black Sea, might Xi believe the time is right for a military move against Taiwan? He would likely welcome re-unification before his expected third term as President to be conferred at the Communist Party Congress in November.
The above paints a bleak picture indeed, but not an impossible or even implausible one. Wars are difficult to contain once initiated. This one may prove to be difficult to contain as well.
Deterrence
As difficult as this might be for many to contemplate, the only way to deter aggressors like Putin, and those of his ilk waiting in the wings, is through strength and demonstration of the will to use it. The West should get involved in Ukraine militarily, if only to create a safe haven in western Ukraine. The Russian hand is weaker than one might suppose. As anti-war demonstrations in over 50 Russian cities may indicate, this war is not popular. An assessment of the performance of the Russian military in the first few days of the conflict in Ukraine is unimpressive. The invading army seems to have low morale and may not quite buy into Putin’s argument that they are on a de-nazification mission. Ukrainian forces are fighting heroically. They deserve our full support.
Read more expert-driven national security insight, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
