Russian roulette: as croupier at
this particular casino table I invite you to place your bets!
The Russia-US-NATO-OSCE meetings this week have come and gone. The Russian verdict was succinctly delivered
by Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Ryabkov, who explained even before
the OSCE session was over that the talks have come to “a dead end” and it was
unlikely the Russians will participate in any follow-on talks.
This opens the question to what comes next.
Official Washington feels certain that what comes next is a Russian
invasion of Ukraine, which could come in the next few weeks and thereby fall within
the timetable for such an operation suggested by State Department officials
when they met with NATO allies ahead of Biden’s December 7 virtual summit with
Putin. The logic put out then was that January-February would be very suitable
for a land invasion given that the frozen ground would well support tank
movements. One might add to that
argument on timing, one further argument that was not adduced: in midwinter it is questionable how long the
Russians would want to keep 100,000 soldiers camped in field conditions near
the border; such stasis in these severe conditions is not conducive to
maintaining morale.
In what I would call a rare show of failing confidence in the predictive
powers of the Biden Administration, U.S. media admit to uncertainty over Russia’s
next moves. However, they cleverly present this by pointing to the uncertainty
of the analysts and commentators on the Russian
side.
A featured article in The New York Times a couple of days ago by their Moscow
correspondent Anton Troianovsky says it all in the title: Putin’s Next Move on
Ukraine Is a Mystery. Just the Way He Likes It”
Indeed, all the best known Russian experts appear
to be stymied, none more so than the ubiquitous Fyodor Lukyanov, host of the
weekly television show “International Overview” and long time research director
of the Valdai Discussion Club, where his peers in the front ranks of American
international affairs specialists have gotten to know him. Lukyanov has in recent days humbly admitted
he hasn’t a clue to what comes next.
Another leading figure in the Russian foreign affairs think tank
community, Andrei Kortunov, director of the Russian International Affairs
Council, has shown in recent interviews that he is no better informed about
what is going on in the Kremlin and what comes next.
Western experts are also shown by our media to be
clueless. Today’s Financial Times article “Russia writes off security
talks…” ends with a quote from Andrew Weiss of the Carnegie Endowment for
Peace: “Nobody knows Putin’s next move. And we’ll all find out at the same
time.”
No right-thinking person likes the thought of a
major war coming to the middle of Europe, as the Ukrainians consider themselves
to be. The United States has still more
reason to worry about a looming war between Russia and Ukraine, because the
outcome of total rout for the Kiev military forces equates to a bloody nose for
Washington: its acknowledged 2.5 billion dollar investment in arming and
training the Ukrainian military will have been in vain, and the loss would
rival the catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan in terms of American global
prestige. The Biden administration would enter the midterm electoral period
reeling from its losses in international relations.
Without wishing the Biden administration ill, I
believe their scenario of a Russian invasion is wrong-headed and unimaginative.
It fails to come to terms with the Russians’ imperatives on altering the
security architecture in Europe as drivers of their current policies, not
settling scores with Ukraine, or bringing them back to a common homeland, as
Blinken & Company repeat ad nauseam.
So what comes next?
In successive articles on this website, I have set out several
scenarios, or algorithms. My most recent prognosis in yesterday’s piece was
that Putin’s Plan B would likely be purely “military-technical” in the sense of
roll-out of medium range nuclear capable missiles in Kaliningrad and Belarus,
to place all of Europe under threat of attack with ultra-short warning times,
such as Moscow finds unacceptable coming from U.S.-NATO encirclement of its
territory. At the same time, Moscow might announce the stationing off of the
American East and West Coasts of its submarines and frigates carrying
hypersonic missiles and the Poseidon deep sea nuclear capable drone, all to the
same purpose, namely putting a pistol to the head of the U.S. leadership. And
now there is even talk of Russia building military installations in Venezuela,
likely to host Russian strategic bombers capable of swift attack on the
Continental United States without flying half way around the world. This is all
very reminiscent of the Cuban Missile affair.
I imagine that this Plan B could come in the next
couple of weeks and would be given three or four weeks to take effect. If the United States and NATO still resisted
coming to terms over changes to the Alliance that satisfy Russian demands, then
I envision a Plan C which would indeed be kinetic warfare, but quite different
from the invasion that figures in U.S. public statements and approaches to its
allies. Without putting a single soldier on the ground in Ukraine or
contemplating direct overthrow of its regime and occupation, Russia could by “military-technical
means,” such as missile and air attacks destroy the Ukraine’s command and
control structure as well as “neutralize” the most radical nationalist militias
and other hostile units now threatening Donbas. The destruction of Ukraine’s
military infrastructure would by itself put an end to Washington’s plans for
extensive war games there later in the year.
We may assume that Russian forces will remain massed at the border till
such operations are completed.
The clean-up of Ukraine, ending its potential to
threaten Russian national security, would be a very strong signal to all of
Europe to back off in practice even if no formal treaties are signed with
Russia at present.
In an exchange with a close colleague in Washington
this morning, we agreed a bet on whether my prediction holds. And in this
casino of international politics, I invite readers to place their own bets on
what comes next.
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022