{"id":7095,"date":"2022-01-24T16:38:25","date_gmt":"2022-01-24T16:38:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=7095"},"modified":"2022-01-24T16:38:25","modified_gmt":"2022-01-24T16:38:25","slug":"can-russia-back-down-in-ukraine","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=7095","title":{"rendered":"Can Russia back down in Ukraine?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\n\n“Russia presented the United States with its demands last month. It requested \u201clegally binding security guarantees,\u201d<\/a> including a stop to eastward NATO expansion, which would exclude Ukraine from ever joining, and that NATO would not deploy troops or conduct military activities in countries that joined the alliance after 1997, which includes Poland <\/a>and former Soviet states in the Baltics<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kyiv and NATO have grown closer over the last decade-plus, and actively cooperate<\/a>. But Ukraine is nowhere close to officially joining NATO, something the US openly admits<\/a>, and something Russia also knows. Still, NATO says Ukrainian future membership is a possibilitybecause of its open-door policy<\/a>, which says each country can freely choose its own security arrangements. To bar Ukrainian ascension would effectively give Russia a veto on NATO membership and cooperation. Removing NATO\u2019s military presence on the alliance\u2019s eastern flank would restore Russia\u2019s influence over European security, remaking it into something a bit more Cold War-esque.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Russia almost certainly knew that the US and NATO would never go for this. The question is what Putin thought he had to gain by making an impossible opening bid. Some see it as a way to justify invasion, blaming the United States for the implosion of any talks. \u201cThis is a tried-and-true Russian tactic of using diplomacy to say that they\u2019re the good guys, in spite of their maximalist demands, that [they\u2019re] able to go to their people and say, \u2018look, we tried everything. The West is a security threat, and so this is why we\u2019re taking these actions,\u2019\u201d said David Salvo, deputy director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy and a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Russia might not like the responses on NATO, but there are spaces where the US and NATO could offer concessions, such as greater transparency about military maneuvers and exercises, or more discussions on arms control, including reviving a version of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty<\/a>, or even scaling back some US naval exercises in places like the Black Sea, which Russia sees as a provocation<\/a>. \u201cThere is still potentially room on those fronts,\u201d said Alyssa Demus, senior policy analyst at the Rand Corporation. \u201cThat\u2019s entirely possible that the US and Russia or NATO and Russia could negotiate on those \u2014 and then maybe table the other issues for a later date.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But if the US and NATO extendthose olive branches or others, that might not be enough for Putin. Neither of thesewill resolve Putin\u2019s fundamental sticking point. He has repeatedly framed the US and NATO as a major security threat to Russia for his domestic audience, including spreading disinformation about the West<\/a> being behind the real chaos in Ukraine. \u201cHaving built up this formidable force, and issued all manner of ominous warnings, he\u2019s got to come back with something tangible,\u201d said Rajan Menon, director of the grand strategy program at Defense Priorities.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“really, Ukraine is already at war. In 2014, Russia illegally annexed Crimea, and exploited protests in the Donbas region, in eastern Ukraine, backing and arming pro-Russian separatists. Russia denied its direct involvement, but military units of \u201clittle green men<\/a>\u201d \u2014 soldiers in uniform but without insignia \u2014 moved into the region with equipment. More than 14,000 people have died<\/a> in the conflict, which ebbs and flows, though Moscow has fueled the unrest since<\/a>. Russia has also continued to destabilize and undermine Ukraine<\/a>, including by launching cyberattacks on critical infrastructure<\/a> and conducting disinformation campaigns<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is possible that Moscow takes aggressive steps \u2014 escalating its proxy war, launching sweeping disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks, and applying pressure in all sorts of ways that don\u2019t involve moving Russian troops across the border and won\u2019t invite the most crushing consequences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But this route looks a lot like what Russia has already been doing, and it hasn\u2019t gotten Moscow closer to its objectives. \u201cHow much more can you destabilize? It doesn\u2019t seem to have had a massive damaging impact on Ukraine\u2019s pursuit of democracy, or even its tilt toward the west,\u201d said Margarita Konaev, associate director of analysis and research fellow at Georgetown\u2019s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And that might prompt Moscow to see force as the solution.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/www.vox.com\/22894163\/russia-ukraine-putin-biden-nato<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Russia presented the United States with its demands last month. It requested \u201clegally binding security guarantees,\u201d including a stop to eastward NATO expansion, which would exclude Ukraine from ever joining, and that NATO would not deploy troops or conduct military activities in countries that joined the alliance after 1997, which includes Poland and former Soviet states in the Baltics.<\/p>\n

Kyiv and NATO have grown closer over the last decade-plus, and actively cooperate. But Ukraine is nowhere close to officially joining NATO, something the US openly admits, and something Russia also knows. Still, NATO says Ukrainian future membership is a possibility because of its open-door policy, which says each country can freely choose its own security arrangements. To bar Ukrainian ascension would effectively give Russia a veto on NATO membership and cooperation. Removing NATO\u2019s military presence on the alliance\u2019s eastern flank would restore Russia\u2019s influence over European security, remaking it into something a bit more Cold War-esque.<\/p>\n

Russia almost certainly knew that the US and NATO would never go for this. The question is what Putin thought he had to gain by making an impossible opening bid. Some see it as a way to justify invasion, blaming the United States for the implosion of any talks. \u201cThis is a tried-and-true Russian tactic of using diplomacy to say that they\u2019re the good guys, in spite of their maximalist demands, that [they\u2019re] able to go to their people and say, \u2018look, we tried everything. The West is a security threat, and so this is why we\u2019re taking these actions,\u2019\u201d said David Salvo, deputy director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy and a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund.”<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

“Russia might not like the responses on NATO, but there are spaces where the US and NATO could offer concessions, such as greater transparency about military maneuvers and exercises, or more discussions on arms control, including reviving a version of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, or even scaling back some US naval exercises in places like the Black Sea, which Russia sees as a provocation. \u201cThere is still potentially room on those fronts,\u201d said Alyssa Demus, senior policy analyst at the Rand Corporation. \u201cThat\u2019s entirely possible that the US and Russia or NATO and Russia could negotiate on those \u2014 and then maybe table the other issues for a later date.\u201d<\/p>\n

But if the US and NATO extend those olive branches or others, that might not be enough for Putin. Neither of these will resolve Putin\u2019s fundamental sticking point. He has repeatedly framed the US and NATO as a major security threat to Russia for his domestic audience, including spreading disinformation about the West being behind the real chaos in Ukraine. \u201cHaving built up this formidable force, and issued all manner of ominous warnings, he\u2019s got to come back with something tangible,\u201d said Rajan Menon, director of the grand strategy program at Defense Priorities.”<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

“really, Ukraine is already at war. In 2014, Russia illegally annexed Crimea, and exploited protests in the Donbas region, in eastern Ukraine, backing and arming pro-Russian separatists. Russia denied its direct involvement, but military units of \u201clittle green men\u201d \u2014 soldiers in uniform but without insignia \u2014 moved into the region with equipment. More than 14,000 people have died in the conflict, which ebbs and flows, though Moscow has fueled the unrest since. Russia has also continued to destabilize and undermine Ukraine, including by launching cyberattacks on critical infrastructure and conducting disinformation campaigns.<\/p>\n

It is possible that Moscow takes aggressive steps \u2014 escalating its proxy war, launching sweeping disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks, and applying pressure in all sorts of ways that don\u2019t involve moving Russian troops across the border and won\u2019t invite the most crushing consequences.<\/p>\n

But this route looks a lot like what Russia has already been doing, and it hasn\u2019t gotten Moscow closer to its objectives. \u201cHow much more can you destabilize? It doesn\u2019t seem to have had a massive damaging impact on Ukraine\u2019s pursuit of democracy, or even its tilt toward the west,\u201d said Margarita Konaev, associate director of analysis and research fellow at Georgetown\u2019s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET).<\/p>\n

And that might prompt Moscow to see force as the solution.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[552,390,728,272,355,314,259,1070,315,311,619,158],"class_list":["post-7095","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-share","tag-conflict","tag-diplomacy","tag-europe","tag-foreign-affairs","tag-foreign-policy","tag-international-relations","tag-military","tag-nato","tag-russia","tag-ukraine","tag-united-states","tag-war"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7095","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=7095"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7095\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7096,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7095\/revisions\/7096"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7095"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7095"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7095"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}