• Ukraine War: No Peace Under Putin • India & Russia: A Decaying Friendship
“For Fools rush in where
Angels fear to tread” • Alexander Pope, 1711
Germany’s leading newsmagazine Der Spiegel has recently published an interview with an authoritative German commentator on Russian & East European Affairs (Sep. 23). Dr. Liana Fix, 34, a historian and political scientist [educated at the London School of Economics and the University of Giessen, Germany] has very cogent and level-headed views on Putin’s war in Ukraine.
Her interview provides a very clear-cut, comprehensible and stimulating commentary on various aspects of the Ukraine War – perhaps the most exceptional to date.
It is not surprising that her views converge with those of Lawrence Freedman (Emeritus Professor of War Studies at King’s College, London), probably Europe’s leading expert on Peace & Conflict Studies.
In his latest essay in Foreign Affairs (Sep.23), Prof. Freedman points out that Putin’s mobilization was described as “partial”, but in fact it was quite substantial and “Nothing… removed the stench of failure surrounding the enterprise.” However, “failure is not something that Putin and his inner circle can acknowledge.” Russian dictator Vladimir Putin has ordered a partial mobilization and is now seeking to annex occupied territories in Ukraine.
Putin remains entrenched in power and solely in control of Russia’s destiny. “The largest country in the world, with the most nuclear weapons, is ruled by one man” (Fareed Zakaria/ WaPo).
The fact is that with his new decree of “partial mobilization”, Putin has stirred up a hornets’ nest. Things are getting out of control. Men are voting with their feet – tens of thousands are fleeing the ‘fatherland’.
After two years of self-imposed pandemic self-isolation, Putin’s mind must have been warped to such an extent, that:
• His delusions of grandeur know no bounds
• His narcissistic tendencies expanded beyond reason
• His sense of invincibility has hit the cealing
• In a word: L’etat ce’st moi.
Who or what will bring Putin down to earth?
Does this mark a new phase in the armed conflict?
Dr. Fix is definitely of the opinion that the antagonists and their respective allies are now entering the most dangerous phase of the war yet.
The partial mobilization is Putin’s tacit admission that he would lose the war if he did not act now.
It is a step taken from a position of weakness, not strength.
The mobilization does not necessarily mean that Russia is on the path to victory. It will, in fact, cause many problems for Russia.
Russia may have the raw quantity. But the quality of the soldiers, training and equipment will not be on par with the Ukrainians.
Crucial is the time factor. It will take valuable time to complete the partial mobilization. Putin made a grave mistake by dithering! It can be expected that the U.S. and the Europeans will strike while the iron is hot and further arm Ukraine.
How does Putin’s New Move affect Ukraine?
It poses major new risks for Ukraine and the West, according to Dr. Fix.
Ukraine now has to be prepared for the war to drag on.
The West now cannot count on reaching a negotiated settlement with Putin in the near future.
Has the Balance of Power on the Battlefield Changed?
The Russian defence minister announced that 300,000 reservists would be called up for active military service. That’s a high number and it remains to be seen how quickly and if that number will really be achieved.
The decrees issued for this purpose mentions quotas to be set for different regions.
The 300,000 troops cannot be deployed in Ukraine immediately. The mobilization will only be felt gradually in the medium term. At the same time, it will not remedy the structural weaknesses so clearly demonstrated by the Russian army in recent months.
Wont the Russian Army become More Powerful?
Ms. Fix believes that Russia, in the first instance, will try to use the new troops to stabilize areas it has conquered, i.e. prevent a collapse of the army in those places.
Russia has difficulty producing modern, high-tech equipment [because of Western sanctions]. And it has no allies to turn to. China and India have turned out to be ‘fair weather friends’.
The strategic advantages that the Ukrainians now have in the war continue to give them a good chance of being able to fight and win. But it will take time. Perhaps time is of the essence for Ukraine. Will Partial Mobilization Affect the Morale of Russian Troops? Russia has already indefinitely extended the contracts of those soldiers already in Ukraine.
If one was serving on a three or six-month contract and now suddenly see no perspective of ever getting out of this war, that is doubtless terribly and incredibly demoralizing.
Furthermore, inexperienced troops [those incoming] tend to worsen morale rather than improve it.
Can Russia Train So Many Soldiers in a Short Period of Time?
Dr. Fix argues convincingly that this is not possible.
Many officers who could conduct training are already tied up in Ukraine.
The Russian army is under enormous pressure to secure the occupied territories with new troops as soon as possible.
Putin started his ‘special military operation’ on the (mistaken) assumption that it would be over quickly and, therefore, no new recruits were planned.
The partial mobilization was not part of the plan. In fact, Putin wanted to avoid any mobilization at all costs. Such an imposition on the Russian population was not envisaged at all.
Why then is Putin taking this Risk?
Ms. Fix attributes this to two factors.
First, he was lately under heavy pressure by nationalists, by rightwingers and right-wing radicals, some of whom were within his security apparatus and have long been demanding that Russia undertake much more in the armed conflict.
Second, he must demonstrate success to his own citizens in order to maintain his legitimacy. He cannot show weakness toward domestic liberal forces that oppose his autocratic regime.
Was the Escalation then Foreseeable?
Dr. Fix generously concedes that it came as a surprise.
She notes that when Putin was under pressure in the past, he often reacted indecisively and looked for the middle ground.
She expected that he would try to avoid mobilization through more covert recruitment, like what took place in prisons and penal camps.
For her, partial mobilization is a surprisingly clear step, even though it avoided full mobilization and the impact on the people in general and the logistics it would require.
It was a clear indication that the threat of losing this war was very real in Moscow.
How should the West React to Putin’s Escalation?
It is crystal clear that Russia wants to draw a new national border around the Ukrainian territories it already occupies. Ukraine, on its part, will respond – as it must – with continued attacks to liberate these territories and make it clear that such annexation is unacceptable. In such a situation, the West cannot stop Ukraine. Not if one is convinced of the principle of territorial integrity and national sovereignty enshrined in the UN Charter.
In 2014, Russia set a precedent in Crimea. Its modus operandi is to annex territory and declare it sacrosanct through a sham referendum. The West cannot and must not repeat the same mistake by accepting a Russian fait accompli.
What can the U.S. & Europe do specifically?
The West will impose further sanctions against Moscow.
It will also use the window of opportunity until Russia can use the newly recruited soldiers to arm Ukraine even further militarily.
The West should supply even more Weapons to Ukraine? Even German Leopard tanks?
Dr. Fix is convinced that this will happen.
Isn’t this Dangerous with a Dictator like Putin with his Back against the Wall?
Putin’s escalation policy links the war even more closely to his very person. Apparently, he is willing to take enormous domestic political risks to turn the armed conflict to his advantage.
For the people in Ukraine, but also in Russia, this development is a tragedy.
How serious are Putin’s threats of a nuclear strike?
These are not new. Putin has merely repeated them.
The nuclear rhetoric is, of course, dangerous. However, the use of nuclear weapons will ultimately harm Russia much more than it helps.
Dr. Fix categorically rejects the scenario where Russia will use nuclear weapons.
Prof. Freedman writes that if Putin does order the use of a nuclear weapon, it “would make a bad situation catastrophic.” “Using nuclear weapons would be an existential gamble for Putin” (Hal Brands/Bloomberg).
Can/Will Vladimir Putin Turn Back Now?
Putin would have to come under enormous domestic pressure to step back, according to Ms. Fix. Currently, she doesn’t envision a stepping back in the sense of serious negotiations with Ukraine or even a military withdrawal.
How Will the Ukraine War End? Dr. Fix envisages no clear-cut end to the war.
There will be bitter military battles, but not an end in the conventional sense whereby one party loses on the battlefield, admits defeat and then negotiates. Instead, the war will lead to lasting instability, both in Ukraine and Russia.
Prof. Freedman: “Putin is on course to lose, and given the many thousands of lives already sacrificed, he fully deserves to do so.”
Can there be Peace as Long as Putin is in Power?
According to Dr. Fix this is not possible.
As long as Putin or a like-minded successor pursues such policies and ambitions, there can be no peace.
[If the West continues to stand by Ukraine resolutely, the global rules-based international order will be preserved – and reformed – and there will be no Goetterdaemerung, in spite of Putin’s insidious nuclear blackmail ].
End of the Indo-Russian Entente? In a remarkable and insightful essay in Foreign Affairs (Sep. 22), Happymon Jacob (Associate Professor of Diplomacy & Disarmament at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi) questions India’s longstanding friendship with Russia (going back to Soviet times), being the first Indian professional and public intellectual to do so.
Prof. Jacob argues that Russia is slowly but certainly losing India as a friend (and well-wisher). Putin’s Ukraine gambit has now doomed a long partnership.
In the United States and Europe, India’s reluctance to condemn Russia for its war against Ukraine was the subject of much debate and criticism. India was relentlessly criticized for effectively abetting Putin’s agenda by remaining on the sidelines.
Jacob cites the foreign policy establishment in New Delhi who insist that “such a reproach is unfair and fails to appreciate India’s nuanced position on the war.” They argue that India is “merely navigating between clashing geopolitical powers, Russia and the United States, that happen to be two of its major partners.”
The fact remains that India notably abstained from key votes about the war in Ukraine in the United Nations.
Meanwhile, it has also toughened its statements about the invasion, censuring the killing of civilians and the violation of territorial