Would Putin like to “get the gang back together” and continue rebuilding his sphere of influence in the former Soviet states? Absolutely. Is that his primary goal? Not even close.
Putin’s stated goal for decades has been preventing NATO expansion, which he views as an existential threat to the Russian Federation’s survival. His “special military operation” obviously failed spectacularly in this regard.
Putin was furious when Estonia and Latvia joined NATO; he’s clearly not happy about Finland and Sweden joining either, but Ukraine? Ukraine would be the ultimate insult.
So what’s the best way to keep Ukraine from joining NATO?
You could corrupt their electoral process and install a puppet. They tried that and failed.
You could conquer the whole country. They tried that and failed.
You could keep them in a perpetual state of warfare—a stalemate and a war of attrition—knowing that NATO won’t allow them in while they’re tied up in a hot war. That’s where we’re at now.
In 2015-2016, Russia was working on two additional fronts: devastating Ukrainian critical infrastructure with a barrage of cyber attacks, and interfering in our Presidential election.
For context here: remember some of Russia’s goals with their 2016 influence operation:
Electing Trump furthered their goal of keeping Ukraine in conflict indefinitely.
To be clear, in February 2022, Russia seems to have shifted their goals temporarily; They legitimately thought they could take Kyiv in a 3-Day operation, in what has to be one of the biggest intelligence failures in history.
Now they’re back to plan stalemate. Some of this is because they know if Trump gets elected in 2024, US support for Ukraine (and probably NATO) will end.
With this understanding of Russia’s goals, the way forward is pretty clear in my eyes:
We give Ukraine what they need to win. Immediately. Simply giving them enough to defend themselves only acts to further Russia’s goals of a tactical stalemate.
A tactical stalemate will never put enough pressure on Putin to force an end to this war. We have to stop being risk averse and let Ukraine go on offense.
This last aid package — combined with EU support — goes a long way towards advancing this capability, but we still have work to do.
But if the real object is #NATO , IMO, it's time for NATO to get in the fight. I think NATO should directly guarantee the security of air and sea in non-conflict zones. Further, NATO technical teams should be in harms way at power, water and other key infrastructure sites to deter attacks. Lastly, Ukraine can join NATO in a protectorate status vs full membership.
@GottaLaff What’s funny is that Russia is actually always somehow forward about what it intends to do.
It’s just that the West doesn’t want to believe it would, but rather would believe the obvious lies it keeps telling, like in 2014 when ”no Russian troops were in Crimea”.
This week Belarus accused Lithuania of attacking with drones. A population that is already been manipulated they’re at war with NATO.
It’s all out in the open. The Russian empire wants to be reconstituted.
@GottaLaff
An easier and cheaper method of getting rid of putin would be to get rid of putin. We're spending billions to support Ukraine, a half a billion spent on polonium tea would solve the problem permanently.
Could not agree more.. Russia is as weak as they've ever been and Ukraine has more will and far newer and better resources... Ukraine needs to take territory and use that to end the war.. as well take BACK Crimea....
Add comment