Putin ups the ante over Ukraine as war fears grow

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, debate over NATO expansion was fierce both in Washington and Moscow. In the U.S., a more hawkish stance toward its former Cold War enemy prevailed and NATO moved ever closer to Russia. Some U.S. experts warned that doing so would unnecessarily antagonize Russia and end up causing future conflicts.

“We know the worth of such verbal assurances, fine words and promises,” Putin said about Russia's need for legal guarantees from NATO. “Take the recent past, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when we were told that our concerns about NATO’s potential expansion eastwards were absolutely groundless. And then we saw five waves of the bloc’s eastward expansion.”

Putin accused the U.S. of creating the tensions in Europe by NATO’s growth, dropping out of arms control treaties, seeking to weaken the Russian state and violating international law when it suits U.S. interests.

“They do as they please,” Putin said about U.S. actions, citing the wars in Iraq and Syria. “However, what they are doing, or trying or planning to do in Ukraine, is not happening thousands of kilometers away from our national border. It is on the doorstep of our house. They must understand that we simply have nowhere further to retreat to.”

Putin's tough talk and a number of other factors are leading some Russian experts to see war as almost inevitable.

“Storm clouds gather,” Dara Massicot, a senior policy adviser and Russia expert at the RAND Corp., an American think tank, commented on Twitter. “Through his 'doorstep' remarks he's all but saying he's unwilling to be cornered.”

“In the last few weeks, I have become increasingly convinced that the Kremlin has unfortunately made a decision to invade Ukraine later this winter,” commented Dmitri Alperovitch, an investigator of Russian cyberactivity and the chairman of Silverado Policy Accelerator, a research group in Washington, in an analysis he posted on Twitter.

He said the military buildup amounts to 75% of Russia’s battalion tactical groups and includes artillery, tanks, bridge-laying equipment, mine clearers, air defense units and refueling equipment.

“This is a massive mobilization and a clear preparation for an extensive invasion, not a bluff,” Alperovitch said. “Like a rifle in a Chekhov play, you don’t put it there if you are not expecting to use it.”

He pointed to an increase in cyberattacks on Ukraine, Friday's “diplomatic ultimatums” and unrealistic demands for a security deal to be reached quickly.

“Rhetorically, things are reaching a boiling point,” he said. “Diplomatic language is being thrown out the window and with each day comes a new escalation.”

Alperovitch said the Kremlin may see this as the moment to strike because it can't wait any longer as Ukraine is gaining military strength through NATO armaments that could give Kyiv the upper hand in the conflict in Donbas.

He added that the Kremlin has real fears over Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO.

“The prospect of either country joining NATO (an implicit anti-Russia military alliance) has been and would be unacceptable to any Russian leader – Putin, [Boris] Yeltsin, Gorbachev or even someone like [Alexei] Navalny is viewed as an existential threat,” he said. Navalny is the jailed Russian opposition figure and blogger who is a political enemy of Putin, but he also has voiced nationalistic views.

“From a timing perspective, this might be the best time [Putin] will ever have to invade” because the U.S. is politically divided and focused on confronting China, Alperovitch said.

Also, Europe is dependent on Russia's natural gas and would find it hard to cope in the middle of a winter without its energy supplies, he said.

As for sanctions, which would be imposed on Russia if it invaded, he doubted they would deter the Kremlin because “Russia has learned to live with them, even if it dislikes them.”

“Its economy is much more resilient today to them – including in part due to help from China,” he said. “Moreover, it has learned to expect sanctions no matter what it does.”

“Sanctions on oil and gas industry could be devastating to Russia economically but there is no prospect of them happening now – not with Europe freezing in the midst of a cold winter and inflation skyrocketing in U.S.,” he added.

Alperovitch believes Russia's military leaders may think they can quickly overrun Ukrainian forces and seize much of eastern Ukraine to then stop at the Dnieper River. Eastern Ukraine is home to many ethnic Russians but it would face stiff resistance in western Ukraine, which is predominantly occupied by ethnic Ukrainians.

“He is unlikely to invade western Ukraine but can relatively easily split the country in half along the Dnieper and establish a permanent buffer zone between Europe and Russia, as well as a land bridge to Crimea,” he said about Putin’s possible aims. “He likely believes the military cost will be low – either in initial invasion or its aftermath.”

“Putin is almost 70,” he added. “He knows he has about another decade in power at most. He views himself as a historical leader who has revitalized Russia economically and militarily after the devastating and humiliating 1990s.”

Annexing Crimea with “little cost” in 2014 emboldened Putin, Alperovitch said, and now the Russian president may see this as the moment “to solve other long-festering problems like reestablishing Russia’s sphere of influence in the near abroad before he leaves/dies in office.”

“This is a very pessimistic but unfortunately also realistic outlook on why the invasion is highly likely,” he wrote. “And there is likely little the West can do to stop it.”

Courthouse News reporter Cain Burdeau is based in the European Union.

Follow @cainburdeau

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit