(St. Mary’s Church in Killarney. Image found at this tweet.)
I want to focus on three things tonight that I think are important. Then I’ll do a brief update and then I’m racking out.
First, Russian officials have been ramping up the agitprop against their neighbors. Yesterday, the Russian embassy in Finland, tweeted this out:
Уважаемые соотечественники!
❗️ О случаях нарушения прав, дискриминации и разжигания ненависти по отношению к гражданам Российской Федерации и носителям русского языка просим сообщать в консульский отдел посольства по электронной почте [email protected] pic.twitter.com/RTlsHBOxt3
— Russian Embassy in Finland (@RussianEmbFinla) March 16, 2022
Here’s the machine translation:
Dear compatriots! ❗️ Please report cases of violation of rights, discrimination and incitement of hatred against citizens of the Russian Federation and native speakers of the Russian language to the consular department of the embassy by e-mail [email protected]
A day or so before that, a Russian general officer provided a rather eye opening interview to a Russian tabloid: Komsomolskaya Pravda. I’m posting the first tweet, then copying and pasting the remainder into a quote box. The screengrabs of the interview in Russian are at the thread.
A Russian colonel-general has given an interview to the tabloid KP. It's horrific, but gives insights on Russian goals.
Says police, FSB and prosecutors should follow troops into Ukrainian cities. And undertake "necessary" but "unpleasant" filtering to achieve "de-Nazification". pic.twitter.com/vu1ked3kld— Joanna Szostek ?? (@Joanna_Szostek) March 15, 2022
- As for negotiations he basically admits they are for appearances only. “We can’t not hold talks because we’d be accused of breaking diplomatic norms” he says. “We are holding talks in the hope of peace on our terms. But Ukraine is holding talks to drag out the fighting”.
- He does admit that the “special operation” is not going as Russia hoped or planned. Asked when it will end, he said he originally thought end of March. But now has doubts, because the enemy is like animals, “nationalists with nothing to lose” who will fight to the end.
- Couldn’t really be clearer that Russia’s aim is to purge Ukraine of Ukrainians. If you still think this is all about NATO, you have fallen for a Russian red herring. “De-Nazification” is Russian Orwellian Newspeak for getting rid of Ukrainians who refuse to think they’re Russian.
I think these are important windows into how Russian senior leaders, even if they’re not the ultimate decision makers, understand the war Putin has started by reinvading Ukraine. I also think they’re important to pay attention to as they, along with other agitprop that is being pushed within Russia and out to the world by Russia, is also intended to make everyone else especially jittery. Two nights ago I referenced Tom Nichols argument as to why the US and NATO need to do everything possible to avoid getting directly, militarily involved in the war for Ukraine. He has expanded his argument int0 an essay in The Atlantic. It is important to pay attention to in light of the increased Russian agitprop, threats, and provocations.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is in trouble. Despite his limited gains on the ground in Ukraine, he is facing strategic defeat in a war that no one (including me) would have expected him to lose. The vaunted Russian army has turned out to be a hollow force whose major skill sets seem to be bullying its own conscripts and killing foreign civilians. The Russian air force has underperformed even the lowest expectations; perhaps Russian pilots should have spent more time getting training and logging flying hours instead of doing fancy maneuvers at foreign air shows. At home, Putin distrusts his own security services and is apparently purging some of his top spies. The Russian people are going into the streets, prompting the regime to arrest thousands. The Russian economy is in a deep freeze and is likely to stay there for years.
Only one military force in the world can save Putin from utter humiliation now: NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO intervention in Russia’s war on Ukraine could halt that country’s barbarous attacks. But it would mean war between Putin’s regime and the West, and this war would be such a gift to Putin that we should expect that he will soon do everything he can to provoke it.
The U.S. and Europe should resist such provocations.
Putin knows that the term NATO can still produce a visceral response in Russia. NATO is a traditional enemy—and one many Russians have blamed for their troubles in the past. NATO jets streaking over Ukrainian skies will silence at least some of the protests, and give Putin’s supporters a bigger cudgel when they widen the fascist beatdown of the last Russians who refuse to accept the war.
Inside the Kremlin, meanwhile, Putin could likewise use NATO’s intervention to move against any possible dissent or hesitation. As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky addressed the U.S. Congress yesterday morning, Putin was in Moscow raging away on Russian television against those rich Russians residing abroad “who cannot live without foie gras” and who have now become “traitors and bastards” because they are “mentally” against Russia.
Many of those rich Russians living abroad are the children—and mistresses—of Putin’s inner circle. The Kremlin boss was thus firing a warning shot over the heads of his own sycophants as well as the oligarchs whose pursuit of wealth he has enabled: I expect your loyalty, and I know where you and your families live. A war with NATO would make such threats seem patriotic rather than paranoid. The odds of a palace coup against Putin are already low; the odds of such a move while Russia is at war with NATO are even lower.
Much more at the link above. Aside from the fact that it is nice to see him agree with me about the real meaning behind Putin’s televised diatribe yesterday, Nichols’ argument is the only one I find persuasive regarding why the US and NATO need to keep doing what they’re doing and not do more than providing humanitarian aid, military aid, and ratcheting up the sanctions and economic measures. Nichols’ argument here is not, we can’t assume any more risk because Putin will escalate right into nuclear war, though he does touch on it. Rather, his argument is don’t throw Putin a lifeline. Don’t give him a way out. And while I would still like to see the US and NATO assume more risk for humanitarian reasons, Nichols’ argument is a solid one that deserves to be seriously considered. Especially by those of us national security professionals who have argued for the US and NATO to do more.
The second and third items to highlight are after the jump.