‘Putin has no red lines’: Ex-ambassador explains Putin’s mindset


Point of inflection. I'm Michael Smerconish in Philadelphia. A meeting in Germany among Western defense officials united against Russia's invasion of Ukraine ended without resolution. As to whether President Vladimir Zelensky will get the advanced.

Battle tanks for which he pleaded. This after Russia warned that if NATO's further arms Ukraine with battle tanks and long range missiles, it will lead to a whole new level of war. It's been nearly a year since the Russian invasion. The United States.

Perspective has shifted during that time. Remember the unwillingness to be a participant in a three way deal that would have had the United States backfill Poland's fleet of fighter planes after Poland gave MiG 29 fighters to Ukraine.

The Biden administration said no. Initially, the administration was unwilling even to acknowledge providing Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. But with the passage of time has come a softening of the Biden.

Administration's reluctance to go all in. Today, Ukrainian troops are in Oklahoma being trained to operate the Patriot Air Defense System, which the U.S. is now supplying. The U.S. is also providing Stryker combat vehicles.

To transport Ukrainian soldiers on the battlefield as part of a new and massive $2.5 billion aid package. And reports suggest a U.S. willingness to greenlight Ukrainian efforts to target Crimea annexed illegally by Russia in 2014.

So what accounts for the change in U.S. position? Has the Western objective changed from giving Ukraine what it needs not to lose to arming Ukraine with what it needs to actually win? And is our weapons supply.

No longer tempered by concerns over provoking Putin by crossing his red line? My next guest says the latter is the wrong question to be asking. Nigel Gold Davis is the former U.K. ambassador to Belarus, former head of the economic section of the British Embassy in Moscow, now senior fellow.

For Russia and Eurasia at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. And the author of this recent piece in The Times. Putin has no red lines. Dr. Gold Davis A Red Line. That's a trip wire for escalation. Why do you think it's flawed?.

Thinking to be guided by an adversary's red lines Yeah, I think that a red line is a bad and unhelpful metaphor in thinking about our policy towards Russia. It implies that some special category of action.

That if we undertake it, will automatically in a trigger like way provoke some dangerous and escalatory action. In practice, that's really not how international relations works. It's not how we should be thinking.

About Putin. Putin wants to assert there are such red lines, but his nuclear bluff in particular has been repeatedly called and shown to be empty since this war, since his invasion began in practice. The actions he will take at any given point.

Will depend upon his assessment of the risks and benefits of doing those actions. And he might claim he might threaten that he'll do something. Dangerous and radical against us. But in practice, what he does or doesn't do will be based on a practical calculus So our goal should be.

Not to deter ourselves by fear of what he might do, but to persuade him Putin that escalating the war is radically against his own interests. In simple terms, are you saying that no longer must we worry.

That his response might be nuclear? If we do X, Y, or Z, we should always be concerned about the possibility of nuclear escalation? It's not there's not a zero risk of that. But our efforts should be focused not on wondering and worrying about what might cause him to do that,.

But to persuade him that under any circumstances he's going nuclear and breaking that taboo would invite disastrous consequences himself. So we should be aiming to deter him from going nuclear, not deterring ourselves.

From doing things that might cause them to go nuclear. Dr. Gould Davis, has there been a change in Western thinking that initially what we wanted to do was supply Ukraine with what.

Ukraine needs to do to repel the Russian invasion to now given the strength of the Ukrainian effort? Hey, they can win this thing. Let's give them what they need to actually win the war. I think that's right.

And that's partly a consequence of the tenacity, bravery and heroism and adaptability. That Ukrainians themselves have shown. I also think there's now there's a growing recognition that there's no practical distinction between on the one hand.

Helping Ukraine to stave off defeat and on the other hand, enabling Ukraine to win. Anything short of a Ukrainian victory would ultimately mean that Russia is better off and not worse off than it was at the beginning of this invasion.

And that would be an intolerable outcome. It would show that flagrant aggression is rewarded. That would be an object lesson to anyone else in the world, including China, watching this. There's also no prospect that any outcome short.

Of a Ukrainian victory and a defeat for Russia would be a stable outcome if this war was somehow to end with Russia better off occupying territory and also violating the people on that territory. There's every expectation that Russia.

Would, in due course, seek to launch a third invasion after the first of 2014 after the second of 20, 22. So that would not be a stable outcome. The only stable, durable outcome that serves Western security interests.

And international morality and international law at this point would be a defeat for Russia. But I think it's also very important for the West to send a message to Russia, the message of reassurance that if Russia will to retreat back to its internationally recognized borders.

No one threatens Russia, that will be a safe and stable outcome for Russia.

Sharing is caring!

3 thoughts on “‘Putin has no red lines’: Ex-ambassador explains Putin’s mindset

  1. So Putin is merely pronouncing “I’m capable of attack you in any which manner that I want BUT you are no longer allowed to defend yourself in any which manner that YOU resolve on!” Wow!! It’s the entitlement for me! 🤦🏾‍♀️

  2. So the west is in actuality pronouncing as soon as Russia is willing to crawl down they moreover willing to crawl down with it,so they are willing to sacrifice all individuals to die than let a a part of Ukrainians die by myself sounds indulge in a engaging belief

  3. There are neither few or any hypothetical redlines in the most up to date doctrine of battle. The West, USA and NATO has vociferated what we regard as equitable measures to assist Ukraine in discipline subject strengthen and navy benefit. As we know there are “parts of competitors” that the Kremlin could perhaps perhaps perhaps no longer indulge in and obtain unsettling; in the pretext of the most up to date Ukrainian ground battle, which presentations no impress of waining. In the eagerness of sanity, worldwide stability, our self-serving pursuits and democracies alike, we are providing armed forces benefit to assist Ukraine fend off a pre-sure invasion gone awry, unwilling to end the least bit costs. In nearly one Three hundred and sixty five days it’s evident that this battle has gone past Mr. Putin’s realization of a “72 hour particular operation.” Long gone rogue. Western and EU counterparts, brings justice to bear for the defenders, in their steadfast pursuit. The escalation as considered is Russia’s resolution to comprise the simpler-hand the least bit costs, albeit life is meaningless and a pittance.The Russian supposition is that the existence of Ukraine is null and void and which skill truth by extension no longer a identified country, however allotment of the Russian Utter Federation (RSF). The West has over time sullied the Russian Utter Federation and which skill truth lends credence to the Russian aggression, the battle of attrition and Mr. Putin’s iron fist of diplomacy. Mr. Putin miscalculated the chain of events and nearing the Three hundred and sixty five days anniversary he’s made insignificant beneficial properties, get sum zero. At what label does this clarify additional aggression when there’s inside strife, no exit thought in inspect, an ad-hoc armed forces campaign and aging Soviet equipment who’s foot troopers battle below harsh stipulations and an unrelenting or absent suppose.The sands of time creak eerily past. The grey lines are drawn in sand, steadily adrift on this battle of wills. The end result of this RSF invasion, bloody battle, will predicate the fabric of societies, initiating governments, the free will of of us, our economies and social consciousness. Perchance soon, one day, this comes to fruition and unwilling entities can pursue a total reason?

Leave a Reply