Allowing Russia to rebuild the USSR will have serious consequences for Europe

David Grigorian

29 March 2025

On March 18, 2025, in a speech delivered in German parliament, chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz said: “It is a war against Europe and not just a war against the territorial integrity of Ukraine.” This was part of his pitch for a sizeable defence and infrastructure funding bill, underpinned by a promise to do “whatever it takes” to protect freedom and peace.

While Mr. Merz and his German and European colleagues undoubtedly understand what is at stake, if the history of the Russo-Ukrainian war of the past three years is of any guidance, they may not get the full picture of Russia’s possible manoeuvres. As often happens in any line of business, failing to see the big picture risks making the proposed solutions not go deep and/or far enough.

The reality in the medium term – if Russia is allowed to regroup after Ukraine – could be much gloomier than is suggested and may involve countries that are at present not in the way of the invading Russian armies, countries that were once part of the Soviet Union.

Of course, Mr. Merz and other leaders of Europe are strictly speaking not responsible for the security and wellbeing of countries outside of Europe’s perimeter (however defined) but not seeing the relevance of countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia as well as Belarus and Moldova for the future of Europe would be short-sighted.

The main reason is that allowing Putin to get these countries back under Russia’s control would give him access to a fresh pool of resources, including military recruits, to fight his future wars in Europe.

Here is how this will likely unfold.

Allowing Ukraine to be defeated and giving an opportunity to Putin to sell it as a victory, will most certainly feed his larger ambition and be used as a justification for new aggression. Once allowed to regroup, Putin’s first move would be to reassemble the Soviet Union.

In some cases, Putin won’t need a lot of time to achieve this goal. Belarus is likely to be the first domino to fall, as it is already a part of Moscow’s orbit. Facing serious pressure from within, President Lukashenko is in no position to press against Putin and will be happy to become a founding member of the USSR-2.0.

Not much effort will be needed to formally annex Armenia, a country that has been under Putin’s thumb more than any one of the remaining former Soviet republics. Prime Minister Pashinyan, who has not challenged this domination in any meaningful way since coming to power in 2018, will happily go along. If not, his very low approval rating will make it easy for the Kremlin to replace him with a more popular loyalist.

With Armenia out of the way, subjugating Georgia will be a foregone conclusion. The country’s ruling “Georgian Dream” party is pro-Russian. And while the Georgian public is largely pro-Western, its dissent will be crushed by direct use of force, from both North and South, leaving the country’s leadership no real choice but to sign on the dotted line of the new USSR charter.

Azerbaijan may have some leverage initially and could avoid being annexed directly, due to its strong ties with Turkeyand burgeoning commercial and defence relations with Israel, but this will be temporary. Russia – perhaps in partnership with Iran – could easily subjugate Azerbaijan’s dictator Ilham Aliyev among other means by playing the national minorities’ card. The country’s significant Lezgin, Talish and Tat minorities could be strategically nudged by Russia toward their long-standing efforts to gain cultural autonomy and thus challenge Aliyev’s authority, inherited from his father.

The Central Asian republics have no chance of withstanding Putin’s pressure. Kazakhstan with an indefensible 4,700-mile-long border with Russia is likely to fall within hours, if directly attacked, but will be just as likely to accept the offer to join the new Union. Given the widespread corruption and social discontent, and reliance on Russia for work and remittances, the population of Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan too will likely be enticed to join.

The Russia-led security bloc, the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, will become the law of the land and the framework that will bind the newly re-joined republics of the USSR 2.0 to contribute to the war effort in Europe. Subsequent economic re-integration will be a breeze.

To prevent such an Orwellian scenario from unfolding, first and foremost a much stronger military response against the ongoing Russian aggression in Ukraine would be needed. While the new budget envelope proposed by the European leaders will help modernise the capabilities of the continent’s war machine and re-stock its depleted supplies, they will do little to address the short-term challenges on the battlefields of Ukraine.

Luckily for Europe, Ukraine has the largest and most battle-hardened army on the continent now. Renewed efforts should therefore be directed to empower it fully to fight. Doing so may also be preferable from the standpoint of domestic politics: public opinion across Europe is likely to favour the option of funding the Ukrainian army over putting their own boots on the ground, even after signing of the peace treaty.

Russia’s economy is in dire straits and undermining its ability to fund the war effort should be the second objective. Sanctions’ regime should be tightened, targeting loopholes and putting political pressure on countries with a record of helping Russia evade sanctions. The issue of Russian financial assets frozen in European institutions too should be on the table as a war-time measure.

Finally, more needs to be done to defeat Russia in its own game, the use of soft power. Russia and its strategic assets and interests in neighbouring countries should be made a fair play for any countermeasures, including support of pro-Western opposition movements, more active use of media and propaganda, and more extensive intelligence sharing to undermine Russia’s efforts across Europe and former Soviet republics.

It is hard enough to measure the risk for Europe if Putin finds a willing partner in President Trump in his revisionist take on Ukrainian history and borders. Allowing Putin to rebuild the USSR will have much more serious consequences for Europe, requiring concerted conventional efforts but also out-of-box unconventional thinking to avoid.

………………..

The same author, who is of Armenian descent, wrote an earlier piece, on March 1st:

• David Grigorian

Are the lights to go out all over Eastern Europe? Nato is its only salvation

Ukraine, Armenia and others in Russia’s crosshairs must be allowed to join the Western alliance

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky visited the White House on Friday in the hope of ironing out the details of an economic deal between the two countries. The plan has been in the making since the US Treasury Secretary Bessent’s visit to Kyiv earlier this month. However, the meeting has ended in a shouting match between Trump, Zelensky, and Vice President Vance.

I cannot blame Zelensky for what he was trying to do. The plight of Ukraine could not be more serious. Its hopes of restoring its 2022 borders, let alone 2014, have been dashed. Its quest to join the West via the EU and Nato looks to be in ruins. And as its soldiers fight and die on the frontline, Russian bombs and missiles rain down on its towns and cities.

President Trump has just taken a sledgehammer to Europe’s post-war security architecture, the Nato commitments that have kept the peace for 80 years, seen off the Soviet Union and protected countries large and small.

Trump is right that Europe’s free ride must come to an end. Its countries must spend far more and show greater unity and dynamism in safeguarding their soil from a barbaric Russia. But it stretches belief to think this can be done quickly and without continued American engagement, albeit at a lower price.

Trump is said to be guided by what’s best for America. Isn’t a free, strong, civilised Europe best for America? Isn’t Europe better as an American ally rather than a spurned friend? And what about the thousands of American companies and millions of Americans who work and live across the Continent? Don’t they have a say too?

Perhaps it is all a gigantic bluff and Zelensky will emerge from the gloom as Trump’s new best friend. But no one is betting on it any longer.

But this is not just about Ukraine. It is about the independence of all the small to middling states who have the misfortune to live in the shadow of the Russian Bear.

“A quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing”, was how Neville Chamberlain washed his hands of Czechoslovakia.

Strange that Chamberlain might say such a thing, given that another distant land, Serbia, had lit the spark that sparked World War One – the bloodiest of all human conflicts.

Small countries do matter in that they can set off the most appalling strife as their protectors and antagonists then fight rapidly escalating proxy wars.

I come from a small country – Armenia. I have spent all my working life in the USA, mainly as one of the policemen of sober state accounting, the IMF. My country, not so far from Chamberlain’s lacuna, now also menaced by Putin, must not become the tinderbox for a new conflagration.

The radar screen is flashing red. Azerbaijan, Armenia’s immediate neighbour, failed to let Armenian-populated Nagorno-Karabakh gain independence 30 years ago in a brutal war, then refought the conflict five years ago.

Our Muslim enemy won against the oldest Christian country on the planet. Two years ago, in the final episode of the battle, more than 120,000 Christians were forced to flee their historic homeland.

The world did nothing to stop the Azeri aggression. But this is not over yet. Azerbaijan now outspends Armenia nearly seven to one on guns and bullets. What will happen next? Another war, with this time Russia even more directly involved.

Putin is locked into the agenda of endless military adventurism. Assuming that he gets the east of Ukraine in any future “peace deal”, he will turn his attention to my homeland and nearby Georgia, where Bidzina Ivanishvili is all too ready to abandon the West. Armenia, threatened again by the Azeris, could well be the next domino to fall. 

How is this going to end? Oh, say clever Western analysts, Nikol Pashinyan, Armenia’s Prime Minister for the past seven years, is on our side. Really?

Since Armenia’s independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, meeting Western politicians has been an opportunity for Armenian leaders to put up a “dog and pony” show and lie. They have consistently lied about their ties to Russia, the extent of their corruption, human rights abuses, and election integrity. 

They have done so successfully for the past 35 years, to fend off the Western pressure to reform (while receiving Western funding) and to maintain a course laid for them by the Kremlin. 

Trump and his ministers should study their history books before sitting down with Putin to carve up Ukraine. And they should stop saying that Nato membership for Ukraine is “not a realistic option”.

In truth, it is the only realistic option for Ukraine and for countries such as mine. Some people are talking about “security guarantees” for a post-conflict Ukraine. But the only security guarantee that Putin will take seriously is Nato and Article 5 protection.

The people of Armenia, like many others living in Russia’s shadow, want to be part of the West, not Putin’s gangster empire. That means Nato membership and joining bodies like the European Union. It what looks increasingly like a “might is right” world, this is the only chance of our survival as civilised, sovereign states.

And if Trump really is master of the art of the deal, he will know you don’t start bargaining by halving your price. You certainly don’t start talks with Putin by giving him a veto over Nato membership.

Armenians are longing for change – pro-Western sentiment there is stronger than ever before. However, threatened by Russia, Turkey, and Azerbaijan and manipulated by their own leaders, they need credible Western support to rise up. 

They have done it once in 1988, triggering a movement that led to the demise of the Soviet Union. They are ready and able to protect their own homeland, the cradle of Christian civilisation, but need a helping hand. The West should not ignore their plight.

---

Dr David A Grigorian is a Senior Fellow at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. He is a former IMF and World Bank official