Posted on 03/01/2022 4:28:41 AM PST by Kaslin
From his principal avenues of attack on Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin began this war with three strategic goals.
Send an army south from Belarus to capture Ukraine's capital, Kyiv, and replace the government. Send forces into northwest Ukraine to capture its second largest city, Kharkiv, with 1.4 million people.
Third, extend the Donetsk enclave westward to establish a land bridge to Crimea and give Russia full control of the Sea of Azov and most of the Ukrainian coast along the Black Sea.
This last objective is almost achieved. Yet, as of Monday evening, five days into the war, neither Kyiv nor Kharkiv had fallen, though Russia had committed most of the troops it had assembled for the invasion.
Putin needs to get this war over with, for time is not on his side or Russia's side.
In a week, he has become a universally condemned and isolated figure, and his country has been made the target of sanctions by almost the entire West. He is being depicted as an aggressor, even a war criminal, who is brutalizing a smaller neighbor, which, in its fierce and brave resistance, has taken on the aspect of a heroic nation.
The world is rallying to Ukraine.
In the UN Security Council, which Russia chairs, only Russia voted to veto a resolution denouncing it for aggression. India, China and the United Arab Emirates abstained.
As for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, his defiance of demands for surrender is being portrayed as Churchillian.
Moreover, serious military aid to Ukraine will soon begin.
Europeans and Americans have promised more Javelin missiles to destroy Russian tanks and armor, and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles of the type that took a heavy toll of Russian helicopters in the Afghan war of the 1980s.
NATO is uniting. Germany has voted to raise its defense budget and send its own anti-tank weapons and Stingers to Ukraine.
Economic sanctions imposed on Russia have crashed the ruble, caused a collapse of the stock market and severely restricted Moscow's capacity to manage its debt.
Russian army units in Ukraine may be sufficient to occupy Kharkiv and Kyiv, but that army is insufficient to control and run a country the size of Texas with a population of 44 million people.
The Russians would have to find thousands of collaborators to help run the country. Where would Putin find them among a people that so widely detests him today?
The longer this war goes on, the greater the certainty that it bleeds the invading army to levels intolerable to Mother Russia, which is what eventually happened in Afghanistan in the 1980s.
If this war does not end soon, Putin is likely to lose it and fail in his goal of pulling Ukraine out of the Western camp and back into the orbit of Mother Russia.
Eventual defeat is becoming visible, and Putin probably cannot politically survive such a defeat.
As his motivation is to hold power and use it to carve a niche in history alongside the greatest Russian rulers of the past who enlarged the nation or empire, Putin is probably not going to accept defeat and go quietly.
Nor was it a sign of resignation that Putin, on Sunday, ordered Russia's nuclear forces to high alert because, "Top officials in leading NATO countries have allowed themselves to make aggressive comments about our country."
This is not the first time Putin has introduced the idea of using a nuclear weapon. On Feb. 19, days before the invasion began, Putin ordered drills of nuclear-capable ballistic and cruise missiles, bombers and warships.
In his speech announcing the military operation in Ukraine, Putin warned that countries that interfere with Russia's actions will face "consequences you have never seen."
Would Putin exercise what has been called the "Samson Option" -- pulling down the pillars of the temple and taking your enemies with you?
What Putin is suggesting is that in the last analysis, if military defeat beckons for Russia, and his own dispossession of power and political if not actual death are to follow, he may use the ultimate weapon in Russia's arsenal to prevent it.
What should U.S. policy be?
Avoid a widening of the war by preventing any escalation to nuclear weapons. Secure the independence of Ukraine. Effect the removal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory.
If this requires that Ukraine give up any ambition to become a NATO nation, Putin's declared purpose in launching the war, so be it. We might have avoided this war had we done so before it was begun.
This is not where we appear to be headed.
Finland, and Sweden, it is now being said, should be invited into NATO. Were that to happen, the U.S. would be obligated to help defend the 830-mile Finnish border with Russia.
This would be an act of hubris of the kind that has led to great wars.
The US should withdraw from NATO. Then Europe can begin to reconcile with Russia.
for context, how many times did putin ask publicly for security consultations with nato/the US, and how many times was he replied to privately?
if ukraine not joining nato was on the table, I think we would have heard of it somewhere.
the fact he was already asking publicly meant he knew he would be ignored, almost certainly had been ignored in private communications.
as far as making his case, to whom? would cnn carry a speech by him accurately characterizing his concerns about this, and the historic reasons for it? of course not. if they mentioned it at all, it would be he threatened ukraine.
Thank you for a thoughtful analysis.
Many people still believe that “JFK backed down Khrushchev!”.
I think Russia is saying this because they are scared to death that Ukraine might still be holding some of the nukes that were supposedly all accounted for back in 92. I also think part of Russia’s incursion is to find those nukes. Taking Chernobyl as the first strategic objective sent up some red flags.
“NATO ceased being a defense organization in early 1999, if not before.”
It never was a defensive organization. It was one of economics. We pretended to defend other countries, give them the money to pay their dues back to us, then dictate the economic policies they will follow that favor those that brokered the deals. NATO could never defend against much. The few bases here and there were nearly useless to defend against a mass attack NATO was supposed to defend against.
NATO is a weak threat, no one has paid their full dues, they cannot fight, and Germany and half of Europe is putting their economic existence in Putins hands. It is only a threat to Putin if he wanted to invade those border nations. Trump called all this hypocrisy out.
Even if Ukraine was a NATO country, it was never going to invade Russia.
The US made NATO fight, but is the US going to invade nuclear Russia?
It could be Putins paranoia and that is bad enough especially if nukes are put there... but a NATO imperialist threat of a nuclear armed Russia isn’t happening.
Bump
Putin is putting a lot of fears in his own people back room meetings being held?.
Good discussion.
Some points:
1) Does Putin/Russians have an off-ramp to de-escalate? Does the Ukraine and the West?
2) Assume that Putin de-escalates. When and how do economic sanctions get lifted? I ask this, as when listening to the BBC this morning, it started to sound like “sanctions creep” may enter into the picture. In other words, the West says “you have to do A/B/C/D to get sanctions lifted”. And then the West adds “and you also have to do E/F”. And then “G”. Etc.
3)I think it’s fair to say that if Putin/Russians conclude that the Russian economy will be destroyed beyond repair due to sanctions that they will attempt in some way to break sanctions. How? Who knows. But I also think it’s fair to say that Putin/Russians will not stand by and watch their economy destroyed without a response.
Anyone who knows Trump would know Trump would find a way for Putin to back out with some honor and the sense that he got something.
Of course the fact Trump would let Putin get something would get Trump labelled as a “Putin Lover”.
Politics make for strange bedfellows, or something to that affect, was uttered by someone wiser (not hard to do) than me.
It's so tedious to see pictures of this leader or that leader with the "villain of the day" and calls of "Gotcha! Gotcha!". Those pictures were taken in a snapshot of time that may be years, decades before. A good example is Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with S. Hussein. It's good red meat for the mouth breathers but not much else.
If Biden was a leader, he would look for help wherever he can get it to broker a potential resolution and subsequent deescalation of both sides, or at least plan for it.
But the only thing Biden seems to be able to do is check is pants to see if he has crapped in them.
Amenski
Reasonable people are very refreshing on this forum today
what do the numbers mean?
Percentage of self reported primary languagehttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_language_in_Ukraine Russian speakers in each Oblast.
Yeh, for sure. And, as he continues to be more ostracized he will become even more deranged. Where is Seal Team Six?
thanks
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.