f Putin wanted to invade Ukraine, why hasn’t he already done so...
Theory: Russia’s Grand Strategy remains that they need a territorial buffer between Europe and Moscow.
Nato expansion to the East must therefore be prevented. Ukraine, Finland & Sweden are all making noises about joining.
If Putin invades the Ukraine with a view toward taking the entire country he most certainly prevents the Ukraine from gaining Nato membership... but Finland & Sweden join Nato immediately out of self-preservation.
So Putin is trying to get cute about what his objectives are because he doesn’t want to win a war at the price of p*ssing away the larger strategic objective.
I posted this on a thread yesterday in response to the quoted part at the top. I don’t disagree with your points, but touched on some other aspects, in case you are interested.
“Tucker and his guests keep touting Russia’s “strategic interests” which justify invading Ukraine. This is supposedly because Ukraine is about to join NATO, something which is no where near happening and which is a pretext Putin is raising to justify annexing Ukraine.”
I don’t follow Carlson, but for your consideration:
A. If Putin wanted to invade Ukraine, why hasn’t he already done so, instead of giving NATO/the US time to pour in weapons and advisors?
B. Biden has made it clear enough that the US is not going to do more than impose sanctions and donate weapons, which Russia will end up with (Afghanistan).
C. Europe wants and needs Russian energy, so a sanctions regime is not going to last. This will become a wedge issue that harms EU-US relations and weakens NATO.
D. Putin has at least three objectives:
1. Putin wants to force the US and NATO into allowing “Finlandization” of Ukraine, so that it is not a significant threat on Russia’s southern border. His talk about sending offensive weapons to Cuba and Venezuela is to rachet up pressure for diplomacy since his show of force on the Ukrainian border hasn’t born fruit.
2. Putin wants to dominate Ukraine and force it to be part of a Eurasian economic and security bloc under Russin hegemony, as a counterweight to NATO and the EU.
3. Putin is not a “self-holder” and his power depends on delivering the goods both to his nationalist popular base and the cabal of business oligarchs and the descendants of the KGB-mafia he came from. These elements have substantial operations that suck wealth out of Ukraine. An actual war, with unpopular casualties, destruction of the cash cow, likely expensive occupation requirements for years, economic isolation and massive losses, losing international good will, scaring NATO into greater readiness, etc., is not a good outcome. Diplomacy that gives Russia less control over Ukraine, but at enormously lower cost, is the objective.
A die-hard optimist might think that Biden is brilliantly calling Putin’s bluff by in effect saying, go ahead and invade, because he knows that is not Putin’s desired end game. Absent diplomatic solutions, eventually Putin will invade, to maintain Russia’s, and his own, credibility and power at home. Biden will demonstrate for any slow learners that the US is a feckless ally, leaving Putin in a position to co-opt other Eurasian states into his empire. The result for Ukraine will be catastrophic instead of merely bad.