In the past few days, headlines heralded the unexpected success of the Ukrainian forces: they halted the Russian invasion. Some are already hoping for a turning point as news of demoralisation, disrupted supply lines and heavy losses emerge from the Russian side. Unprecedented Western unity on sanctions and support for the Zelensky government also felt as a fate-changing feat to many. Yet, taking a step back, we must recognise the threat lurking in the new status quo: Putin locking into running amok.
Cover photo: Emilio Morenatti, Associated Press
It seems that Russia’s initial intention was to invade Ukraine on the cheap. The Russian army is far from utilising its full potential (although scaling up in the past few days): it deployed many inexperienced troops, fielded outdated technology and has been reluctant to engage in decisive air operations. The reasons can be both financial and political. Running a high-tech invasion is very expensive, and probably lower resistance was expected; it would also be significantly more devastating, making it difficult even for Putin’s propaganda to sell at home that Ukraine is being liberated: the political risk would be higher.
Still, the initial approach is now dead. The invasion is not achieving its goals. Russia is presented with different options:
Scenario 1: Negotiate and Exit
Russia could try to consolidate gains: take the whole of Donetsk and Luhansk, a land corridor to Crimea, as well as Ukraine’s neutrality in return for a ceasefire and withdrawal. This might be in line with Russian strategic interests. The problem is: it is not in line with Ukraine’s.
Seeing a window of opportunity to run into the arms of the West, Ukraine is likely to take a gamble. If it keeps putting up a fight, it could edge closer to EU membership and NATO security guarantees, while also pushing for better terms with Russia. Since its people are eager, even optimistic, Ukraine is likely to leverage the moment.
Thus, if Russia wants to agree now, it must drop from its demands. But that requires losing face, and Putin does not seem open for such concessions.
Scenario 2: Grind and Burn Money
Russia could accept a slower pace and decide to bleed out Ukrainian forces, eventually bringing the Zelensky government to the negotiation table on Russian terms. This would allow them better discrimination of targets, thus reducing the political cost at home.
But this option requires more money. Money that Russia is short of since the West detached it from half of its reserves. If the war rolls on for months, someone will need to bankroll it. And the only actor potentially capable of that (and interested in) is China.
Then again, Russia’s most important objective is maintaining strategic autonomy. China could alleviate some pain but Russia does not want to sell out. As a fellow friend of mine put it, “in Russia’s coat of arms there is a two-headed eagle: one head looks to the West, the other to the East; if both heads look in the same direction for too long, the Eagle will find a knife in its back”. Considering that Putin probably thinks of himself as a Tsar of sorts, he presumably does not have the appetite to accept the Chinese yoke.
Scenario 3: Hell Breaks Loose
If negotiation is not an option, and the slow grind cannot be financed, only one path remains to force a win: escalation to the point that Ukraine must give up.
Russia is already a pariah, with its reputation as a state tarnished. Sanctions are unlikely to blow it out of the water as it can self-sustain better than most countries in the world. There is not much left to lose. In fact, the only thing Putin has a chance of restoring is the crippling fear of Russia’s power.
That is why this could be the most likely scenario. Russia may try to deliver a death blow to Ukraine in the coming two weeks, unleashing more and more of its deadly arsenal: this would still cost less than a war dragging on for months, maybe years.
Unfortunately, it also poses a quite worrisome question: what if Putin believes that there is so little left to lose, such an isolation of Russia, that the opportunity cost of a tactical nuclear strike exceeds that of restraint? Considering the man’s mad disregard for human lives, I can imagine him doing the math.
There are many questions in such a scenario but one stands out: would there be retaliation? And the cold reality is a strong no. No one would risk all-out nuclear war to avenge the lives of Ukrainians, and thus Ukraine would be brought to its feet or erased from the map. Russia may write itself out of civilisation forever but it would remain feared.
What can we hope for?
First of all, that a shred of humanity remains even in the worst specimen of mankind. If Putin has at least a tiny bit of conscience left in him, he should not consider the deployment of nuclear weapons, should not destroy Ukraine, and should back off while he may. His track record in Chechnya perhaps suggests otherwise.
Secondly, the final scenario, the situation might bring about favourable circumstances for a coup. A coup, because the people have no means to overthrow their government in Russia. Or at least that is what I have seen, but that story is for another post.
I recently visited Victory Park in Moscow, the monumental memorial dedicated to the Great Patriotic War (or World War II). Next to Stalin’s bust a plaque states that his “ungrounded repression against millions of people” took a heavy toll on Soviet society. It reminded me that correction was possible, even in the Soviet Union.
By removing Putin from power, Russia could claim “temporary insanity” and withdraw without losing (that much) face, escaping its embarrassing situation, as well as the tight hold of Western sanctions. The eagle could again look in both directions, just in time to avoid the proverbial knife in the back. All things considered, this may be the best case scenario for all parties involved.
Whether it will happen, I am highly doubtful. For now, more destruction remains the most likely prospect. Hopefully, I am wrong.
Comments