Chilling look at Putin as rational actor
Recent images of Vladmir Putin convey his isolation and arrogance. The Russian president sits at the end of long tables in the Kremlin, yards away from his visitors — alone and aloof even as he issues threats of nuclear war against the West.
The inescapable question, as the world watches Putin defy international law to hammer Ukraine, is whether he is a rational actor. Is he serving what he sees as Russia’s national interests, or is he a distraught dictator driven by an obsessive desire to force Ukraine into a neo-imperial dream?
Public discussion about Putin’s rationality has grown in recent days. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, tweeted Friday that “something is off” with Putin. Sen. Mark R. Warner, D-Va., the committee’s chairman, tweeted Monday that Putin was “increasingly isolated.”
Based on Putin’s record and discussions with U.S. officials, his mental attitude appears to be more of a fixation on Ukraine than a broader instability. This isn’t necessarily comforting, given Putin’s extraordinary willingness to take chances where Ukraine is involved.
U.S. officials believe that Ukraine for years has been Putin’s most sensitive issue — one where his normal political calculus doesn’t seem to apply. CIA Director William J. Burns warned at a business event this past December: “I would never underestimate President Putin’s risk appetite on Ukraine.” Putin broods about Ukraine, rages about its tilt toward the West, and schemes to bring it back under Russian domination, U.S. officials believe.
“Rationality” is the X-factor in military confrontations, especially those that potentially involve nuclear weapons. A leader’s seeming irrationality might be his most compelling bargaining chip. Think of a game of chicken: When one driver throws away the steering wheel, the other driver will surely swerve to avoid a crash.
Putin’s war hasn’t gone well, initially. He misjudged resistance in Ukraine, Europe and the United States. His vast army might well succeed by flattening Ukrainian cities and claiming “victory,” but in the process, he will create a festering wound at Russia’s side. He is creating what might be a generation of enemies.
Rather than make concessions that might allow a face-saving settlement, Putin has lashed out. Facing obstacles during the first week of a limited conventional war, he has threatened a larger nuclear war. He announced Sunday that he was putting Russian nuclear forces on “special combat readiness” because of “aggressive comments” in the West.
There’s a worrying mismatch of asymmetric threats here. President Biden has studiously tried to avoid a direct military confrontation, saying in the hours after Russia’s invasion that “our forces . . . will not be engaged in the conflict with Russia in Ukraine.” But at the same time, the United States and its allies have gone to war economically, imposing crippling sanctions that could, over time, destroy the foundations of Russia’s modern economy.
How does Putin see this confrontation? Judging from his writings and speeches, Putin might believe he launched a limited military war to enforce a Russian “red line” that he has expressed publicly for a dozen years. Rather than acceding, the West has responded with total economic war. Putin’s countermove has been to jump domains, invoking the nuclear threat.
Putin’s behavior follows the script of Thomas Schelling in his classic 1960 study of brinkmanship, “The Strategy of Conflict.” Reckless behavior could be a useful bargaining tactic, Schelling argued. “A careless or even selfdestructive attitude toward injury — ‘I’ll cut a vein in my arm if you don’t let me . . .’ — can be a genuine strategic advantage; so can a cultivated inability to hear or comprehend, or a reputation for frequent lapses of selfcontrol.”
The Biden administration initially tried to shrug off Putin’s attempt to play the nuclear card. Asked Monday if Americans should be worried about Putin’s threat, Biden responded simply, “no.” Press secretary Jen Psaki said the administration saw “no reason to change our own alert levels.” Against Putin’s irrational threat, she countered with the rational response: “Everybody knows that that is not a war that can be won.” Putin’s response was to reiterate the nuclear alert.
As we think about ladders of escalation, America is near the top of its chosen domain of economic war. Putin has brought that devastation on himself; he has doomed his presidency, irrevocably. But in the weeks and months ahead, America and its allies will need to allow Russia an exit ramp to escape this folly — or face everrising danger.