Prime

I’ve written relatively little over recent days on the unfolding Ukraine Crisis. It’s one of those stories that is not only moving quickly but in many ways speaks for itself. I recommend reading Josh Kovensky’s latest report on events. Josh worked in Ukraine as a journalist for two or three years before coming to TPM, so he brings an area knowledge and access to the language that we’re lucky to have. As I’ve mentioned a few times, I’ve been using this Twitter list to navigate the rush of events. I recommend it. I also shared some thoughts on what’s happening in the edition of the podcast that comes out today.

One of the assumptions in much Ukraine commentary is that a full scale Russian invasion of the country would be followed at some point by what would, over time, be a potentially ruinous insurgency. That seems probable. And I suspect it’s the key reason — much more than even the most extreme sanctions — why Russia has so far held back from such a move. Even apart from the bad history of Great Powers getting bogged down in occupations of hostile territory, the military reforms under President Putin, which have revived Russia’s conventional military power, have prioritized rapid strike capabilities over holding territory. Such a scenario would be a catastrophe for Ukraine but it would likely be pretty bad for Russia too.

But this article in Foreign Policy shows how easily this scenario could bleed into a confrontation between Russia and NATO, even though neither side would have any interest in it doing so.

There’s a flurry of commentary this morning arguing that new economic sanctions introduced by the EU, European states individually and perhaps soon the United States in response to yesterday’s events are too weak and show NATO and the EU are somehow going soft. I’d suggest some skepticism with these arguments and a bit more patience. History doesn’t have many one and done moments. Thinking every moment is Munich and Neville Chamberlain mostly makes people dumb. The U.S./EU/NATO powers here need to find a balance between having a response to yesterday’s events while yet keeping some deterrent in reserve for further escalation.

A number of dangerous, disquieting and scary things happened today in the unfolding Ukraine Crisis. Russia is a revisionist, nuclear power. In today’s lengthy and bellicose speech, Vladimir Putin barely mentioned NATO. He focused on his long-attested belief that Ukraine is not a real country and is only separated from Moscow by historical accident and perfidy. Beyond wanting to bring Ukraine to heel he made broad and menacing statements that brought the whole post-Cold War settlement into question.

Scary stuff.

Here are a few possibilities to consider as Russian troops roll into eastern Ukraine.

Russia has shown in various ways in recent weeks that it fears the repercussions of a full scale invasion of Ukraine. Over the last couple weeks, Russia has been hung up on a binary choice: invade or begin a humiliating climbdown. This may be a way to create a third option: occupy and de facto annex the regions that have been under de facto Russian control for eight years, celebrate a great nationalist victory and wrap this crisis up. Declare victory and go home without the huge gamble of full scale invasion.

As I’ve noted recently, I’ve usually been in the ambivalent/skeptic camp when it comes to NATO enlargement. There were many good reasons, from the U.S. perspective, to oppose NATO enlargement back in the 1990s and in the subsequent smaller expansions in the last quarter century. The U.S. has very good reasons not to extend security guarantees with what amount to existential implications to every country bordering Russia or adjacent to its borders which is or feels threatened by Russia. So you can say NATO expansion was dubious policy. Or you can claim, though the evidence for this is murky at best, that the U.S. broke some “deal” it made with the Soviets/Russians at the end of the Cold War. But all of these points ignore a basic foundational question: why did or do all these countries — Poland, Hungary, Romania, Lithuania, et al. — want to join?

One of the uncanny things about what now does appear to be an imminent Russian invasion of Ukraine is that so much is visible in real time. I’ve seen people saying we can’t take American claims of a military buildup or invasion at face value. And skepticism is always warranted about any government’s claims during a crisis. But in fact, between social media and commercial satellite imagery most of the story is unfolding before our eyes. If we’re smart and diligent, we can even fact check a lot of it from the privacy of our own homes.

I’m putting together a twitter list of accounts to follow the unfolding situation. You can view it here. It’s what I’m now using to keep track of events.

The leader of one of Russia’s puppet statelets in eastern Ukraine announced today that he is organizing a mass evacuation of civilians out of the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic and into Russia. As far as I can tell there’s no independent confirmation that this is happening. There are a few different possibilities. One is simply that this is an effort to pull civilians out of what will soon be a warzone. But it is being portrayed by Denis Pushilin, the self-styled leader, as a last chance to escape a coming invasion by Ukraine and what Vladimir Putin and his Donbas region puppets have been predicting will be a “genocide” of ethnic Russians carried out by Ukraine. In other words it looks exactly like the kind of agitprop and confusion campaign Biden, NATO and basically everyone who’s not in active sympathy with Russia has been predicting all along that Russia would use as a pretext to invade Ukraine.

We remain in a period of intense flux and uncertainty. Part of making sense of these periods is having an eye out for shifts that seem to be happening even if we don’t know precisely why they’re happening or what they’re building towards. For example, we keep getting hints that Donald Trump’s power within the GOP is waning. Not collapsing, certainly — nothing dramatic. The GOP is not moving in a Never Trump direction. But he has just a bit less sway and dominance day by day.