Its striking appetite for risk has forced geopolitical rivals around the world to rethink their assumptions
SHERELLE JACOBS11 April 2022 •
Vladimir Putin shocked the world when he audaciously gambled everything on taking Ukraine. But the West has in turn stunned its own detractors with its striking capacity to take risks. In recent weeks, the latter has defied Putin’s threats of nuclear war in order to supply arms to Ukraine. This dicey policy has proved decisive, not just stalling the Russian army but forcing it to retreat from Kyiv.
And now, as Putin desperately regroups in the east of Ukraine, Nato is upping the ante to realise an ambition that was once unthinkable: a definitive military victory for Ukraine. Some of its member countries have agreed to supply advanced and heavy weapons in order to thwart Putin. While Germany remains Europe’s weakest link, in a significant shift, it has lifted its general ban on the export of German-manufactured weapons to warzones.
Of course, triumph for Kyiv is far from guaranteed. Although even some well-placed observers speculate that Russia could be routed in mere weeks, in truth months of gruesome and protracted combat likely lie ahead. Still, the West’s high-stakes tactics are a geopolitical gamechanger. One that compels its adversaries to rethink drastically their immediate strategic goals, as well as their assumptions about a “declining” West.
Russia invaded Ukraine based on a series of staunch beliefs about the “obsolete liberal order” and the consequent opening of a “strategic window” that might force geopolitical change. Its essential assessment was that the West is hopelessly divided, and America the waning superpower is unwilling to risk nuclear conflict for the sake of farflung countries. And yet so far, such assumptions have turned out to be hasty.
True, the West has been disjointed at major junctures in this conflict. True, Joe Biden has been more willing at times to say what his country wouldn’t do than what it would. True, sanctions remain indirect and carefully crafted to limit the economic blowback. But it is also true that the West has managed to do much more damage than the Kremlin anticipated.
Most importantly, Russia has overlooked the West’s fundamental unwillingness to tolerate an outright Putin victory.
Paradoxically, this is probably a reflection of the West’s current weakness more than it is an indication of relative strength. America has opted to engage Putin in a borderline reckless game of bluff partly out of desperation, having woken up to the reality that the liberal order faces existential threat.
A successful Russian bid to neutralise Ukraine followed by China’s seizure of Taiwan would be a massive blow for the West, imposing strict geographic limits on its reach. Indeed, US commanders have heavily intimated that US involvement in Ukraine is also a deterrence operation against Beijing. But, crucially, such a scenario would utterly demolish the romantic ideas that underpin it – namely the universality of Western values. Ukraine then is a do-or-die fight for the West in a way that Putin failed to foresee.
Nor have humiliations in the Middle East quashed the West’s weakness for Hollywood heroism. Moralistic resolve still inflects its geopolitics. Bold adventurism still energises its military posturing. As we have seen over the years, not least in Iraq and Afghanistan, such traits can lead the West to make reckless and deluded decisions. Nor should we be flippant about how this heightens the nuclear threat. But these characteristics also make the West an unpredictable and muscular opponent – something its rivals overlooked.
Of course, Putin may yet steadily recover momentum in the Donbas. But faced with Ukrainian determination and Western unwillingness to relent, he now has little option but to readjust his strategy. His first choice is to try and call the West’s bluff by radically escalating. He may resort to using weapons of mass destruction in Ukraine. Or he may threaten the West with a nuclear strike.
Still, Putin could now struggle to stand up to the West. Even if the latter resisted a military response to the Kremlin’s use of chemical or biological weapons, it could go for the jugular with harder sanctions. Nor can Putin be so confident about issuing threats of nuclear war. A growing willingness to test the Kremlin’s red lines indicates that attitudes in Washington have become more cavalier since the Cold War years. Back then the military establishment accepted that nuclear war was a lose-lose. But in recent years, faced with a new arms race with Russia and China, it has shifted to the view that nuclear confrontations can be fought and won. The Pentagon even altered its nuclear doctrine in 2019 affirming such a view.
Putin’s second choice then is to simply fold, and retreat from a war which will not go his way. Mere weeks ago, the notion that Putin would settle for a couple of eastern territories, let alone contemplate full-scale retreat, seemed absurd. But Moscow may soon be tempted to direct its focus from an unwinnable military war to a global PR battle that is still very much in play. Whether ordinary Russians are presented with a negotiated withdrawal amid disciplined propaganda about the de-Nazification of Ukraine, or the embarrassing collapse of its national army could make all the difference to Putin’s fate.
It is not just Russia that must drastically recalibrate its gameplan in the face of a daredevil West. Having witnessed allied success at sabotaging Russia’s Ukraine invasion, the CCP will be tempted to shelve any plans to confront Taiwan for the foreseeable. Perhaps it will resolve to engage in a longer game, building its military capability and meticulously studying the Russian army’s mistakes. Putin’s struggles are also a wakeup call that Beijing will need to wean itself off Western technology, beef up its domestic consumer market, and construct a parallel global financial system if it wants to minimise its vulnerability to Western sanctions. Such goals will take years to achieve.
Victory for Ukraine is far from assured. But if the West pulls this off, it will not only have saved a country from neo-imperialism, but forestalled a confrontation with China. That would be no mean feat, and a sign that the West, for all its faults, remains a power to be reckoned with.
I managed to get a comment past the mods :
A huge shift in strategy is needed in order to stop genocide.
The Kremlin murder gang has stated that it is now focussed on “liberating” Donbas. In reality it’s just another squalid land grab by this evil fascist regime. If it is allowed to succeed, putler will consolidate and prepare for another assault on Kyiv in the next couple of years or so.
In Donbas, the degenerate rapists, torturers, sadists, thieves and looters that make up putler’s armed forces will be ordered to inflict yet more genocide and savagery upon innocents. This time it cannot be allowed to go ahead.
The solution is to take the little poisoner at his word and install peacekeepers from the allies of Ukraine, supported by air power, to protect Kyiv and the Black Sea coast, including Odessa and Mykokaiv. The Ukrainians can then free off more manpower to defend against putler’s orcs in Donbas.
It can be explained to putler that they are under orders not to engage with his verminous army; unless they choose to engage with us.
The UK’s analogue of Tucker Carlson; Peter Hitchens, produced a filthy propaganda piece for the Mail on Sunday. I managed to get my response published. Usually his mods block me:
Peter Hitchens’ latest kremlin propaganda piece is an utter abomination. There is a staggering amount of evidence that the evil little poisoner is expediting planned, systematic genocide in Ukraine. His army of child murderers, torturers, sadists, rapists, thieves and looters has already committed countless atrocities in the Kyiv region; including child rape and child murder. This latest atrocity in Kramatorsk was a deliberate mass murder of innocent civilians. Five children were murdered. When the truth eventually comes out about the scale of depravity and horror inflicted upon Mariupol, even Hitchens might rethink his revolting, un-English and foul views. Mariupol has a very large ethnic Russian population by the way. The same people that the snarling little rat in the kremlin claims to want to protect. There was a not-at-gunpoint referendum in December 1991. An average of 91% across the board voted for independence from Russia. It was hardly surprising since its evil empire had been raping Ukraine for 360 years. In Donbas it was 84%. In Crimea it was 54%.
Some readers comments to Sherelle’s article :
Kathryn Jones
“Wow, what conflict are you watching? We’ve got the EU which continues to fund the war, their sanctions hitting 10% of the Russian economy whilst still funding 90% of it. We’ve got Western leaders effectively asking Putin’s permission before it takes action. We’ve got a useless old fool in the white house, no more effective than a cardboard cut out. Western militaries under funded and not ready. Then we’ve got Russia changing tactics so as to not bite off more than it can chew, once Russia has the Donbas region it will have a strong foothold with which to push back out into wider Ukraine if it wishes. In the black sea, the West has a fleet doing nothing, whilst Russian ships blockade Ukrainian food exports which they desperately need the money from and countries desperately need the food.
If the West had any guts at all, it would give Russia 48 hours to withdraw from Ukrainian water so as to free up trade, or have their navy destroyed. Without black sea access, Donbas is a lot less useful to Russia without that full access. Turkey is key in all of this.”
Ali White
“You’re normally balanced and spot on Sherelle but you seem to have put on the utopian glasses for this one.
Putin isn’t going anywhere unless he wins or he’s shot by one his own side. The Ukrainians could not even take back the Donbass in the last 8 years so to seriously think Russia will give it up now I think is sadly deluded.”
Stephen Shepherd
“I really can’t share this articles “haven’t the west done well” vibe. How many thousands of civilians have been raped tortured and murdered due to the wests inertia?
Sherelle has this the wrong way round, the west has fallen for Putins bluff on WMD. The refusal to intervene directly is cowardly, if Putin intends to use them he will irrespective of whether NATO steps into Ukraine.
Sanctions and weapon supplies are not saving lives, just prolonging the agony. There is no way Ukraine can be expected to stop Russia on their own … no matter how incompetent their military are. That iis precisely what NATO was created to do.”
Hugh Thomas
“Liberation” of Mariupol Russian style:
– Choose a thriving rich beautiful city
– Raze the city to the ground, uncapable to sustain any life
– Kill tens of thousands, while the rest flee in terror
– Installs Russian flag over lifeless ruins.”
Panteleimon Bratulis
“The EU funds Putin’s war.
We should count Germany as – in the East and not the West. It’s East German Chancellor has appeased the Russians and is a core contributor to the current situation. Not a murmur from the remoaners – how strange.”
Counting Sheep
“If Putin has or does use chemical weapons, the very least the West has to do is give Ukraine all the fast jets and heavy equipment it can use. He cannot be allowed to get away with using chemical weapons. This is a fight against pure evil and it’s not the time for hand wringing or faltering. The West has to make it possible for Ukraine to not only give Putin a bloody nose but break both his arms and legs to boot.”
Justin Wayde
“As usual, an excellent article. The side effect of all this is China feeing it is losing face by supporting a disorganised war criminal like Putrid. Perception and image are everything to the Chinese as well as a desperate need to ensure global trade is uninterrupted. Maybe Xi will be talking to the Russians about regime change?”
Graham Wise
“Gambled everything? Nope, not at all. The only way to deal with tyrants like Putin is straight for the jugular. Give no room for him to wiggle or escalate. We know he utterly controls the domestic narrative. We know his peons and their money are deeply inside our institutions. We know we rely on his oil and gas. We know that reversing these will take time. Time, the narrative and oil are his battleground, not the Donbas. Zelensky understands this and implores friendly nations to up the ante. Meanwhile we prevaricate in case it hurts a little bit domestically. No, not gambling everything at all.”
Edward Danczak
“After Pearl Harbour Admiral Yamamoto said, “I fear we have awoken a sleeping giant”. Russia has not been any kind of superpower since 1989 when its iron curtain states all turned west.
The top six NATO states have a combined GDP 30 times that of Russia, with the industrial and economic muscle to do something about a threat from Russia.
Russia relied upon Ukraine factories to produce components for its weapons, which are now unavailable. Apart from the human cost, the materiel cost is far greater than the corrupt Russian machine can replace.
A well armed and motivated army reading the opposition intentions in real time, (GCHQ and NSA/CIA) will eventually overcome the apparent large armies from Russia. It cannot compete, and has been unable to do so for quite some time.
The best Russia has been able to do is to fund a durable disorder in eastern Ukraine, which will likely collapse as Russia is forced to withdraw in the face of economic and military collapse.”
Bruce Burniston
“Germany is posturing. It’s affinity for murderous, imperialistic Dictators, who defy the basic rules of humanitarian conduct is sadly apparent.”
OTTO SMITH
“Surely now is the time for the US, the UK and Europe to move their nuclear armaments, submarines, airforce to strategic positions to show Putin that any attempt by him to unleash such a strike in Ukraine will have the result of Russia seeing the terrible threat which will ensue and destroy its major cities. You can’t reduce the issues to standing up to bullies. That is playground talk. The Russian government is a constant threat to world peace, trade and the wellbeing of every nation including its own. Let them see the potential repercussions from their threatening behaviour. What is happening in Ukraine will go down in history as tyrannical behaviour totally unexpected in this century but likely to spread to other countries bordering Russia. Placing nuclear facilities in strategic positions showing Russia what could happen is the only way to halt this horrendous behaviour.”
Jones insulted cardboard cut outs. A cardboard cutout has more on the ball than Biden.
Correction; SOME in the West have gambled everything. Some have barely done anything, specifically Germany and France.