Putin’s strategic failures and the danger of escalation
Nigel Gould Davis argues that Russia’s invasion in Ukraine is a strategic error. Is escalation the best option for Putin, as the situation becomes more unpredictable and volatile?
It is now clear that Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was motivated by delusions about Russia, the West, and Ukraine. Putin unleashed forces to weaken his country and his own position, regardless of the outcome.
First, Putin underestimated Ukraine’s cohesion as well as its will to resist. He called for the surrender of Ukrainian forces when he declared war. While many have preferred to surrender than die, many Russian soldiers have done exactly the opposite. Putin called for the Ukrainian military to overthrow President Volodymyr Zilensky, proving his delusions. Instead, Ukrainians, who have never been able to use a gun, are now learning how to do it and making Molotov cocktails to defend their country. Putin is accomplishing the work that he started in 2014 to unify Ukrainian society and strengthen its national identity.
Second, Putin underestimated the strength and cohesion of Western resolve. Russia is now facing a variety of sanctions that have never been applied to a major economy. This includes the freezing of central bank assets. The German policy has changed dramatically with the suspension of Nord Stream 2’s gas pipeline and the exclusion from SWIFT Russian entities. Also, the historic decision to ship weapons to Ukraine. Russia’s overreach unleashes the West’s latent power, just as it did in the late 1940s or late 1970s. This response is stronger than ever, due to two reasons. The West has the economic tools to strike Russia faster and harder. Western unity is not limited to states and societies. Russia is not supported by any significant group of opinions. Private companies and organisations are adding their cultural and sporting restrictions to the government’s sanctions.
Russia’s aggression, which is a threat to the international order and Western security, receives virtually no support from other countries. New export controls have been implemented on semi-conductors by major Asian countries. Russia’s prewar military performance and its inconsistent diplomacy have not made it a more attractive partner. China’s vote to condemn the invasion of Ukraine in the UN Security Council meeting on February 25th makes a mockery the three-week-old Putin-Xi friendship declaration with ‘no limits. Russia, except for Belarus, is not supported by post-Soviet autocrats. Putin is isolating Russia.
Third, Putin underestimated the domestic opposition. He made the most unpopular decision of his life by waging war on fellow Slavs. The stated goals – to “denazify” a country with a democratically elected Jewish President and to stop a genocide that doesn’t exist – are not credible. Demonstrations began the day after the invasion, despite a tightly controlled civil society. There were already 3,000 arrests. The state media are directed to refer to the invasion as a “military operation” and to only cite official Russian sources. The authorities lost control of a porous information space and began restricting access to Twitter.
Even more, the Russian elites are anxious. Senior government officials were anxious, and Putin was humiliated during a televised meeting of Security Council. Numerous celebrities have voiced their opposition to this war. The entire business class will be affected by the tsunami of sanctions, not just the oligarchs. This is important because war is not just a battle of arms but also of wills. The conflict will be shaped by the Russian misgivings and Ukrainian optimism on the battlefield and at home. Opposition to war is important for domestic reasons, too. Putin’s regime will be weakened from the inside and below by the invasion, its human cost and the pain of sanctions.
The invasion is a strategic disaster. The Kremlin suddenly becomes weaker on all political fronts as Russia’s isolation from the world and Ukraine’s resistance deepen. This is the latest in a series of failures. Putin resorted to compellence when controlled instability was created by occupation and the Minsk Accords fell apart. He went to war when compellence failed. Even more adverse effects are now being caused by war.
What is Putin going to do?
Putin has every incentive for the end of the war as soon as possible. He could use two methods to do so. He has begun to explore the second option, which is to win war by drastic escalation. However, the meaning of victory has become less clear than ever. Russia may be able to occupy Ukraine at great human costs, but no Russian puppet government it installs will ever be legitimate or stable. Russia’s domestic crisis and isolation will only get worse.
The second option is for Putin not to achieve his goals and to negotiate a cease-fire in the regime change in Kyiv. Putin’s obsession in Ukraine and the stakes that he has raised make this a difficult task. He would only consider it if his regime was at risk. Russia has not yet taken seriously the Ukraine-Russian negotiations. Vladimir Medinsky is the party hack and an undistinguished ex-culture minister without any diplomatic or military experience. The talks are a distraction or, at best, a prelude for forced capitulation by Russia as it intensifies its indiscriminate attacks against civilian targets.
As with every stage of Russia’s failure to help Ukraine, escalation is the most risky course of action. However, it is also the best option. It will not make Russia worse off. It is now up to Russia how far they will escalate. Putin made a vague threat to the outside world by declaring war on Russia. Putin has now placed Russia’s nuclear forces under a “special regime of combat duty”. He stated that if anyone decides to destroy Russia, they have the right to reply. It will be a disaster for humanity and the entire world. But I’m a Russian citizen and its head of government… Why would we need a world that doesn’t have Russia?’ Putin stated that Ukraine was a’very real threat to our interests and to the very existence our state’.
The West is arming Ukraine, pushing Russia’s financial system toward collapse. This is a more unpredictable and unpredictable situation than the Cold War crises that erupted in Hungary, Berlin, and Czechoslovakia. These events had predictable outcomes but posed no threat for Soviet domestic stability. Putin is acting out of anger at the West and making grave misjudgments. We are on uncharted territory that is frightening.