Ukraine Crisis: End Game

 

"The strong do what they can & the weak suffer what they must" - Thucydides

On 24^th Feb 2022, Russia, sprang a surprise, attacking Ukraine, in an act dubbed by many as the largest conventional Military attack in Europe, since World War II. Initially, its “shock & awe” approach of flattening airstrips, military bases, missile defenses, radars & command & control structures was successful but the invasion of their land forces was struck, thereafter, due to logistical issues; Russia relies on railways to transport supplies & pipelines to transfer energy & water & has less of trucks, currently impeding logistics. Meanwhile, as the Ukrainian forces are demolishing bridges to slow the advance, Russia appears intent to capture Ukrainian Railways. Taking over cities, through which  the Railways pass is hence necessary, to protect supply lines; this has the potential of further affecting the pace of advance. While some cities like Kherson have fallen – unblocking a water canal & restoring water supplies to the Crimean peninsula – seized by Russia in 2014 -the rest like capital Kyiv, Ukrainian 2^nd largest city Kharkiv, Chernihiv etc. are holding out a seize – cut off  from food, water & other basic supplies - & battling an artillery barrage costing lives.

The Ukrainian request, to its Western allies, to create a "no fly zone”, over the nation, was rejected with the NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, saying "We are not part of this conflict. We have a responsibility as NATO allies to prevent this war from escalating beyond Ukraine” indicating that the West has reduced Ukraine to a sacrificial lamb, prodding it to fight with about $500 million defense aid plus humanitarian assistance. 

"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal" - Henry Kissinger

The Ukrainian strategy of urban warfare & a protracted war of attrition would be impeded because of difficulties in getting the pledged military assistance into besieged cities. Even if they put up a brave resistance, the infrastructure destruction, in the warzone would take decades to rebuild. Guns & rocket propelled grenades distributed to citizens to aid resistance, now, could lead to emergence of armed militias, available for hire in Ukraine or beyond in Europe, portending more violence in the coming years.

US Senator Republican, Lindsey Graham called for the assassination of Putin, by someone in his inner circle, as Brutus did to Julius Caesar, in Rome or Col. Stauffenberg, unsuccessfully, attempted on Adolf Hitler, in Germany. Russia denounced it as ‘terrorism” & the US state department quickly distanced itself from the statement, dismissing it as not reflective of the official view. But the change in the behavior of Putin - generally seen in close proximity to his Security Council members, but off late seen staring down from a distance, like a Tsar - indicates paranoia.  

That brings on the next question: What explains the timing of Putin’s Ukraine invasion?

Putin has been President or Prime Minister of Russia, for over 2 decades, since 1999. As per former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, while he has constantly displayed an image of being “cold & calculating” – consistent with his KGB lineage - his actions now appear “erratic”. It is, however, possible that Putin spent the last 2 decades rebuilding Russia – broken after the dissolution of the USSR – & having now built over $630 billion in Forex reserves & military preparedness tested in campaigns across Georgia (2008), Crimea(2014) & Syria (2015) is now attempting, as Former US National Security Advisor, HR McMaster says “to restore Russia to greatness”. Are reports of his ill-health true explaining his current actions as accelerated attempts to leave behind a legacy, despite having a chance to remain President till 2036? Or is it simply a case of Russian patience waning to the WEST, repeatedly, merely reiterating its statement that Ukraine shall not join NATO “in the near future” against their demand for a security guarantee from Ukraine & the West that the former shall never “ever join NATO’s ranks”. The last straw, was perhaps, on Nov 10^th when the US & Ukraine signed the Charter on Strategic Partnership which asserted Washington’s support for Kyiv’s right to pursue membership of NATO. 

Putin believes that the collapse of the USSR was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20^th century, leading many to fear that he is keen to resurrect a similar empire again; surely, he knows that it is improbable, but nudging installation of friendlier regimes in his neighborhood is always a possibility, to protect Russian security interests. That he labelled the  idea of Ukrainian statehood “fiction”, created by “Bolshevik Communist Russia’ by “Lenin & his associates’ by dividing, tearing from her (Russia) pieces of her own historical territory” indicates, not revisionism, but keenness to protect / incorporate Russian enclaves in the former Soviet Union, if neighboring countries turn unfriendly.  German Vice Admiral Schoenbach, was nudged to resign for his view that “Putin wants high level respect. Giving his respect is low cost, even no cost. Give him the respect he demands & probably also deserves. We need Russia against China”

The following sequence of events indicates that this crisis has been boiling for over a decade now:

1990: US Secretary of State James Baker assures USSR President Gorbachev of “not one inch eastward” expansion of NATO - a promise that helps in USSR blessing German reunification.

1991: USSR collapses; Ukraine – a former Soviet republic – emerges with the 3^rd largest Nuclear weapons stockpile after the US & Russia.

1994: Under the Budapest Memorandum of Security Assurances, Ukrainian nuclear weapons transferred to Russia in lieu of compensation, debt relief & security assurance by the US, UK & Russia. Ukraine must be ruing the decision now, as Ukraine with nuclear weapons could have imposed deterrence better.

Western nations restricting intervention, in the current crisis, to sanctions alone, could prompt many of the other nations, going forward, not to TRUST western security guarantees; no wonder North Korea while negotiating with the Trump regime earlier wanted to retain some nuclear weapons as an insurance against regime change.

1999: Czech Republic, Hungary & Poland joins NATO; breaking of the 1990 US promise to Russian consternation.

2004: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovekia & Slovenia join NATO despite Russian protests.

2008: President George Bush proposes NATO membership to Georgia & Ukraine at the Bucharest summit; EU members like France & Germany oppose move mindful of Russian concerns leading to membership postponement – keeping it "open ended" - but not an outright permanent rejection, to Russian annoyance. Putin invades Georgia signaling his reservations & takes over Russian speaking areas of South Ossetia & Abkhazia.

2009: Albania & Croatia join NATO

2014: Euromaidan protests in Ukraine – widely seen as Western inspired - deposes a pro-Russian President Victor Yanukovych – ostensibly, on his refusal to sign a Political & Trade agreement with EU - & a pro-Western one installed, forcing Yanukovych to seek refuge in Russia. Protests in Russian speaking areas of Donbass - Donetsk & Lugansk (D&L), perhaps instigated by Putin who also annexes the Crimean peninsula – that hosts the Black Sea fleet, providing Russia access to the Mediterranean & its bases in Latakia & Tartus in Syria.

France & Germany initiate talks, under the Normandy format, leading to a ceasefire under the Minsk agreement & offer granting of autonomy to D&L areas, in lieu of foreign forces withdrawal. The aggeement was NEVER implemented, by either side, leading to deepening fault-lines.

Ukraine revokes the legal status of Russian as a national language & blocks access to Russian news - TV & radio - leading to minority angst. Chants of “One Nation, One Language, One people” amplified in the Ukrainian broadcasting media created an envenomed siege mentality among the minority, easily available for Russian exploitation.

2017: Montenegro joins NATO

2019: UK enters into an agreement with Ukraine to develop two new naval ports – Ochakiv in the Black Sea & Berdyansk in the Sea of Azov, a move seen by Russia as threatening.

2020: Macedonia joins NATO

Ukraine made a "NATO Enhanced Opportunity Partner" & presence of US & UK warships in the Black Sea increase.  The unilateral withdrawal of the US from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty & missile deployment in former Warsaw pact countries – Poland & Romania – seen as threatening Russian security & color revolutions to engineer regime change – in Russian neighborhood - are other of Putin’s grievances.

2022: Putin seeks stoppage of the eastward expansion of NATO but offered no face saver, despite stacking Russian soldiers across the border, including in Belarus, invades.

That brings us to the Question: What is the end game in Ukraine

Putin recognized the independence of Russian speaking areas of D&L on 21st Feb, paving the way for openly sending troops & weapons into those areas. Since Crimea was annexed in 2014, he could now build a corridor connecting both those areas thereby capturing the ports of Berdyansk & Mariupol.  An amphibious expedition to the port of Odessa could follow & then a corridor to connect with the Transvestia – a breakaway region of Moldova – that houses significant Russian population. With South & eastern flanks of Ukraine securely under his belt he effectively cuts off Ukraine from the Black Sea & the Sea of Azov eliminating the country’s Navy. The thrust from the North, towards Kyiv, could capture the seat of govt.  He might prefer imposing a puppet regime – perhaps of Victor Yanukovych - & retreating rather than getting embroiled as the Soviet forces did in Afghanistan during 1979-89.

While Ukrainians are displaying a brave resistance with citizens’ too carrying guns & using Molotov cocktails, the inability of Ukrainian forces to launch missile or air raids into Russian territory indicates that their assets have been largely neutralized. Even if they do, the Russian S 400 missile defense system with a capacity to simultaneously target 72 targets in a 400 Kms range can take them down. A swarm drone system that could have countered the S 400 system is unlikely to be supplied by the West to Ukraine; even if they do, training the forces could take time. It appears that Ukraine – the weaker power - is counting on gaining a moral ascendancy via an information warfare by inviting Russian mothers to come to their country to take back their captured Russian soldier sons. MANPADS (Man portable air defense system) or shoulder fired surface to air missiles (stinger missiles), though, appears to be keeping the near air space strife competitive & anti-tank Javelin missiles the Russian ground forces in check.

Of the 1 million strong Russian Armed forces, only 3.5 lakhs is the army, of which 1.5-2 lakhs has already been deployed to Ukraine, insufficient to hold territory, or control a population of about 45 million Ukrainians. The West might prefer a situation where Russian forces get entangled with an unfriendly population as they suffered, in Afghanistan, during 2001-21. However, since battle is being fought on Ukrainian territory, the country’s infrastructure shall be damaged – similar to Syria or Afghanistan – needing huge funds for rebuilding. Aware that the West is merely watching from the side-lines even as their sovereignty has been challenged & to avoid the heavy costs of rebuilding battered infra, Ukraine can propose the following during the peace talks with the Russians.

(1)Accept Crimea as part of Russia (as it was annexed in 2014 & is unlikely to be recovered)

(2)Accept implementation of the 2014-15 Minsk agreement that proposed autonomy to Russian speaking areas of D&L. (As it reverses the Independence announced by the regions & retains it as part of Ukraine)

(3)Promise to NEVER join NATO but explore possibility of joining the EU economically.

In lieu of Russia agreeing to the following

(1)Withdrawal of Russian forces to the borders - in 2 weeks - & complete withdrawal to the barracks in 3 months’ time.

(2)Promise NEVER to invade Ukraine going forward

(3)Not force regime change

Ceding territory (ex. Crimea) is an unpopular decision, with likely consequences of loss of power, in a democracy & hence it is unlikely that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would agree to the same; he, however, risks losing the entire country, apart from loss of life & property,  if invasion persists. Cutting losses is a sane decision though rarely practiced, clouded by an over optimistic prediction of the future.

The US could have offered withdrawal of sanctions, federal structure in Ukraine - as proposed by Germany & France to resolve the D&L & Crimean crisis of 2014-15 which the Obama administration had rejected – Russian as a 2^nd national language & a permanent non acceptance of Ukraine in NATO in lieu of Russian withdrawal from Ukraine; instead they are busy posturing & inciting the conflict promising more weapon deliveries.

Henry Kissinger’s 4 point Plan

Henry Kissinger – the former NSA & Secretary of State – who served multiple US Presidents - has suggested a 4 point plan, to resolve the Crimean crisis in 2014, cautioning leaders in the West & Russia to “returning to examining outcomes, not compete in posturing” that could serve as a template even today. The demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one” he reasoned. The 4 principles he suggested

(a)Ukraine should be free to choose its economic & political alliances

(b)Country should not join NATO

(c )Ukraine should establish a government “compatible for the expressed will of its people’”- perhaps a euphemism for Democracy unlike autocracy in the neighborhood – and emulate Finland in terms of international posture – not a NATO member even while working closely with the West

(d)Russia to recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea while Ukraine reinforces Crimean autonomy

“The test is not absolute satisfaction but balanced dissatisfaction” he ended to ‘avoid the drift towards confrontation. He was prescient. Ukraine could be a zone of peace – a bridge between Russia & the West – via the above agreement, in a Normandy format with EU, UK & US as guarantors.

A peace deal is however contingent on:

The Objectives of the participants to the Crisis:

The objectives of the 4 major players to the conflict:

(a)Russia wants a sphere of influence – an end to the eastward expansion of NATO - just as America did via the Monroe doctrine (1823) - that effectively carved North & South America or entire Western hemisphere as its sphere of influence with a threat that any European power’s interference in Americas would be viewed as a hostile act against the US - & Roosevelt corollary (1904) – which granted the US the right to get involved in the internal affairs of a Latin American country in cases of clear & long term wrongdoing.

(b)Ukraine wants close embrace of the WEST by joining EU economically & NATO militarily, to maintain its territorial integrity & economic security – as it has been an independent nation only for 31 years (1991 till date) since the 17^th century.

(c )EU wants strategic autonomy – independent of the US – by engaging with Russia & China – despite US opposition. Mark Germany’s approval to  Nord stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia – for its energy security –even if it meant denial of transit fees to Ukraine in which another pipeline runs, earlier;  even now, post the eruption of the conflict, it has only suspended & not annulled it. Likewise, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, signed an EU-China Investment deal with China before demitting office – ignoring China’s labor rights records - actions that did not have the US’s full backing. Likewise, France & Germany, in 2014-15 proposed a federal structure for Ukraine with rights to the Russian minority to avoid a conflict on continental Europe – against US opposition.

(d)US wants to deny strategic autonomy to EU & proceed with the eastward expansion of NATO to contain Russia. Note that German chancellor Olaf Scholz initially offered helmets & not arms to Ukraine & was forced a retreat post meeting POTUS Biden indicating a likely arm-twisting.

Against the background the

Way Forward Scenarios:

(A)SHORT WAR: Russia makes a quick dash towards Kyiv & imposes a puppet regime; in such a scenario most of their demands shall be met.

(B)LONG WAR: If Russia faces resistance from Ukrainians with Molotov cocktails & guns & wants to cut its losses, a US – Taliban 2021 kind of deal likely.

The peace deal I proposed is to prevent scenario 1 which the US shall stave off unless they face the daunting prospect of the likely collapse of the Ukrainian resistance. One thing is clear: in this conflict of geopolitical ambitions, Ukraine shall be the unfortunate casualty.

Conclusion: While both Russians & Ukrainians are ethnically similar Slavs & practice Orthodox Christianity, the latter have always yearned to be freed from the Russian yoke.  As a case in point, Ukrainians welcomed the German forces when they set foot on their soil during the 2^nd world war. Thus while Putin talks fondly about the Russo-Ukraine Empire, in existence since the 9^th Century, ruled with Kyiv as capital, the Ukrainian identity politics & nationalism have been Russian irritants even during the Tsarist times. Even during the Soviet era, Ukrainian language was banished from schools.

Russia should reflect on why many of the former Warsaw Pact nations are keen on joining the EU & NATO rather than feel safe under the Russian orbit. That Poland – which was the headquarter of the Warsaw Pact – a NATO counter - is the most active nation in challenging the Russian invasion buttresses the point.

The US might want Russia to get entangled in Ukraine - to sap its strength - as they suffered in Afghanistan while European powers Germany & France might be more inclined to seek a détente to avoid a continental war as they did when Russia invaded Georgia (2008) or annexed Crimea (2014).  It is likely that the brave Ukrainian resistance could force Putin to order a bloody assault, on cities, to bring the war to a quick conclusion. He might prefer installation of a puppet regime of former president, Victor Yanukovych, rather than try to hold territory which would anyways be difficult with an under 2 lakh force.

Ukraine should evaluate Henry Kissinger’s 4 point plan seriously. Sweden, Finland, Switzerland & Yugoslavia remained neutral  providing a buffer zone - during the cold war period - which Ukraine could emulate. By offering a peace deal to Russia of accepting the annexation of Crimea, implementation of the Minsk agreement (2014-15)that promised autonomy to Russian speaking areas of Donbass & permanent withdrawal of its application to join NATO in lieu of Russian forces' withdrawal could help secure peace & reduction of the costs of rebuilding the battered infrastructure. Else, the end game, with Western absentation of boots on the ground & reluctance to impose a ‘no fly zone” over Ukraine is not difficult to predict. In this geopolitical chess game, Ukraine is the unfortunate casualty.