by Ted Snider Posted on February 24, 2022

Update (2/24/22, 1:30pm EST): Recent events suggest that Putin’s response was not calibrated to avoid a larger action in Ukraine. It is an unfortunate choice. Wherever responsibility lies for the events that have led to this crisis, war is always the wrong answer. It is unfortunate that thirty-one years of American broken promises and broken diplomacy led to this event; it is unfortunate that Russian broken diplomacy launched it. All wars must be criticized: no matter who launches them.

All they had to do was two things they were willing to do.

They had to put it in writing this time. The US and NATO had to put it in writing that they would not expand east and invite Ukraine to join NATO. 

The US has told Ukraine that NATO membership is unlikely for them in the next decade. Biden has publicly stated that "the likelihood that Ukraine is going to join NATO in the near term is not very likely." German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has said that "The question of [Ukrainian] membership in alliances is practically not on the agenda." He then repeated more strongly that it "is not even on the agenda." Even Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky asked how far Ukraine should "go on that path" to NATO membership, asking "Who will support us?" and acknowledging that aspiring to NATO membership could be more "like a dream."

But the US, UK, Germany and NATO had said before that NATO would not expand, and NATO metastasized to Russia’s borders. Putin is a student of history. And he is not going to go down in history as the second Russian leader to be deceived by verbal assurances that were not put down in writing.

They had to fulfill the promise of the Minsk agreement. The best chance for settling the Ukrainian conflict, the Minsk agreement promised autonomy for the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine. That agreement was endorsed by the Security Council. It was also endorsed by the US. But, though they were willing to grant the Donbas autonomy, they hadn’t. Richard Sakwa, author of Frontline Ukraine, told me that "Kiev openly declared that it would not implement the Minsk agreement." And the US declined to pressure them. But Russia was blamed. Sakwa says that "Moscow’s patience [was] exhausted."

Russia’ decision to recognize the independence of Donetsk and Luhansk comes only days after Putin met with French President Macron and German Chancellor Scholz. Presumably it became clear to Putin that France and Germany, despite the desire and intention, lacked the strength to enforce Minsk. Anatol Lieven, senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, recently told me that hardliners in the Russian establishment had been very critical of Putin for bowing to pressure from Angela Merkel of Germany and not going much further than annexing Crimea in 2014. He also said that the Russian elites have given up on Germany and France. Recent meetings must have finalized that despair. 

The US was willing to at least delay pushing NATO membership to Russia’s border and to grant autonomy to the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. But they did neither. So Putin did. Biden blundered; Putin lost patience.

In a way, Putin’s decision to recognize the independence of the Donbas region and to send in peacekeeping troops is symbolic. Sakwa called it in an email correspondence "A game-changer in which nothing changes." Nothing changes because no one – not the US, not the EU, not the UN, probably not even China – will recognize the independence of the Donbas. The US has also always believed that Russia already has troops in the Donbass. A senior US official said that Russian peacekeepers in Donbas would "not be a new step" and would only make Russia’s presence "more overt."

Putin’s response seems to be a calibrated attempt to not lose the crucial support of China and to not trigger US accusations of invasion that would bring about the US’s "decisive response." 

Given that Russia and China coordinate closely on such major foreign policy moves and that Putin and Xi just spoke in person on the sideline of the Olympics, it seems unlikely that China was not informed of Putin’s decision or that Putin would risk the partnership or China’s much needed support in its showdown with the US over Ukraine. China will likely not agree with Putin’s move, and they will likely not recognize the independence of the Donetsk or Luhansk regions: China is adamantly opposed to interference in the internal affairs of sovereign nations, to invasions and to secessionist movements or recognition of regions who secede. But, as they did with Crimea, China will likely blame the US for forcing Putin’s hand and support Russia. On February 23, China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said that "the U.S. was fueling tensions by providing weapons to Kyiv" and accused the US of creating "fear and panic." But China would draw the line at invasion or annexation, and Putin kept carefully short of crossing that line.

Though there are already loud accusations of invasion, recognizing the region’s independence falls far short of invasion. The senior US official saidthat "Russian troops moving into the Donbas would not in itself be a new step. Russia has had forces in the Donbas region for the past eight years. . . . They are apparently now making the decision to do this in a more overt and open way.” The statement suggested the possibility that the US does not really see Russia’s move as crossing the line of invasion. Though the US has subsequently begun using the word, or at least the, perhaps carefully chosen, words "the beginning of a Russian invasion." The EU has not yet.

Though the US immediately went to their reflex move of responding with sanctions, they said that the sanctions were “not the swift and severe economic measures we’ve been preparing in coordination with allies and partners should Russia further invade Ukraine.” That could mean that they are not the severe measures brought on by an invasion because the US does not see it as the full invasion they fear, or it could mean that the sanctions they say are still to come will be the severe ones. On Tuesday, while Germany said they would re-examine certification of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline linking Germany to Russia, the US was still considering the scope of their sanctions. 

It is possible that Putin has attempted to accomplish two unfulfilled goals while not losing China or triggering the invasion response by the US. Having lost patience for the US and UN to put in writing a promise not to expand east to Russia’s border, he pushed Ukraine’s border away from Russia’s border and created a buffer zone. 

Secondly, having run out of patience for Ukraine and the West to act on the Minsk agreement and grant autonomy to the Donetsk or Luhansk regions, he simply recognized their independence. The one thing Russia was never going to allow was repression and violence against the ethnic Russian people of the Donbas. Sakwa told me that most of the ceasefire violations have exploded on the Donbas side of Ukraine. According to UN data, 81.4% of civilian casualties occurred in the "self-proclaimed ‘republics’." The sniper firing, according to people with knowledge of the Donbas, has been devastating. Moscow sees no choice, according to Sakwa, but to relieve the suffering of almost 4 million people in the Donbas.

Though Russia’s decision may have come as a surprise, perhaps it shouldn’t have. Sakwa says that, although the recognition of the region’s independence marks "the end of shadow boxing and we move into full-scale confrontation," Putin "had effectively warned of this in his 17 February response to the US/NATO responses to the European Security drafts treaties of 17 December." Russia warned that their security concerns were being ignored. NATO was insisting on keeping the doors open to Ukraine and the US was refusing to put pressure on Ukraine to enforce the Minsk agreement. Putin compared the current situation with "having a knife against our throat," the exact words used by Cuba and Iran in the past to describe the feeling of negotiating with the US.

There remains the hope that the recognition strategy of Putin and foreign minister Sergei Lavrov – who favors diplomacy and negotiations in the situation but supported the recognition – is a strategy to increase Russia’s leverage. There is the hope that it is a bargaining chip: that if Ukraine hopes to negotiate the Donbas region back into the Ukraine then it will have to agree to grant it the autonomy promised by the Minsk agreement. Russia may be holding out one last hope that the US will trade an end to NATO expansion east and that Ukraine will trade autonomy for the Donbas for Russia rescinding its recognition and withdrawing all forces from the Donbas. Russia, and others, have learned the need for such leverage when negotiating with the US. The hope, however, is discouragingly dim. The West, Sakwa argues, is "hermetic:" it is no longer capable of listening or understanding another side or another view. This, he fears, is "the end of diplomacy." Maybe it ended long ago. Biden promised an age of relentless diplomacy. But the US and NATO’s broken promise of no NATO expansion to the east has long been one of Russia’s core concerns, and the US has been unwilling to acknowledge that promise or diplomatically negotiate Russia’s legitimate concern.

Biden blew an opportunity to put in writing and to put in force two things he was willing to do: prevent the door from being fully open to NATO membership from Ukraine and recognize the autonomy of the Donbas. Instead of doing what he was willing to do, he chose to signal resolve to Russia and not show weakness. What Biden saw as weakness was a real chance at a diplomatic settlement that could have helped defuse the new cold war. What he saw as resolve has led to Russia losing patience and recognizing the independence of the Donetsk or Luhansk regions.

Ted Snider has a graduate degree in philosophy and writes on analyzing patterns in US foreign policy and history.

READ MORE:

https://original.antiwar.com/Ted_Snider/2022/02/23/bidens-historic-blunder-and-putins-loss-of-patience/

READ FROM TOP.

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.

This is what happens when a bunch of ragged hyenas, jackals and tiny rodents poke The Bear: a new geopolitical order is born in breathtaking speed.

From a dramatic meeting of the Russian Security Council to a history lesson delivered by President Putin and the subsequent birth of the Baby Twins – the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk – all the way to their appeal to President Putin to intervene militarily to expel the NATO-backed Ukrainian bombing-and-shelling forces from Donbass, it was a seamless process.

The (nuclear) straw that (nearly) broke the Bear’s back – and forced its paws to pounce – was Zelensky the Comedian, back from the Russophobia-drenched Munich Security Conference where he was hailed like a Messiah, saying that the 1994 Budapest memorandum should be revised and Ukraine should be nuclear-rearmed.

That would be the equivalent of a nuclear Mexico south of the Hegemon.

Putin immediately turned Responsibility to Protect (R2P) upside down: an American concept invented to launch wars in MENA (remember Libya?) was retrofitted to stop a slow-motion genocide in Donbass.

First came the recognition of the Baby Twins – Putin’s most important foreign policy decision since going to Syria in 2015. That was the preamble for the next game-changer: a “special military operation (…) aimed at demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine”, as Putin defined it.

Up to the last minute, the Kremlin was trying to rely on diplomacy, explaining to Kiev the necessary imperatives to prevent heavy metal thunder: recognition of Crimea as Russian; abandon any plans to join NATO; negotiate directly with the Baby Twins – an anathema for the Americans since 2015; finally, demilitarize and declare Ukraine as neutral.

Kiev’s handlers, predictably, would never accept the package – as they didn’t accept the Master Package that really matters: the Russian demand for “indivisible security”.

The sequence, then, became inevitable. In a flash, all Ukrainian forces between the so-called line of contact and the original borders of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts were boxed in as the occupying force of territories of two Russian allies that Moscow had just sworn to protect.

So it was Get Out – Or Else. “Or else” came as rolling thunder: the Kremlin and the Russian Ministry of Defense were not bluffing. Timed to the end of Putin’s speech announcing the operation, the Russians decapitated with precision missiles everything that mattered in terms of the Ukrainian military in just one hour: Air Force, Navy, airfields, bridges, command and control centers, the whole Turkish Bayraktar drone fleet.

And it was not only Russian raw power. It was the artillery of one of the Baby Twins, the DPR, that hit the HQ of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Donbass, which actually housed the entire Ukrainian military command. This means that the Ukrainian General Staff instantly lost control of all its troops.

This was Shock and Awe against Iraq, 19 years ago, in reverse: not for conquest, not as a prelude for an invasion and occupation. The political-military leadership in Kiev did not even have time to declare war. They froze. Demoralized troops started deserting. Total defeat – in one hour.

The water supply to Crimea was instantly re-established. Humanitarian corridors were set up for the deserters. “Remnants” now include mostly surviving Azov battalion Nazis, mercenaries trained by the usual Blackwater/Academi suspects, and a bunch of Salafi-jihadis.

Predictably, Western corporate media has already gone totally berserk branding it as the much-awaited Russian “invasion”. A reminder: when Israel routinely bombs Syria and when the House of One Saudi routinely bombs Yemeni civilians, there is never any peep in NATOstan media.

As it stands, realpolitik spells out a possible endgame (see Donetsk’s head, Denis Pushilin: “The special operation in Donbass will soon be over and all the cities will be liberated.”)

We could soon witness the birth of an independent Novorossiya – east of the Dnieper, south along Sea of Azov/Black Sea, the way it was when attached to Ukraine by Lenin in 1922. But now totally aligned with Russia, and providing a land bridge to Transnistria.

Ukraine, of course, would lose any access to the Black Sea. History loves playing tricks: what was a “gift” to Ukraine in 1922 may become a parting gift a hundred years later.

It’s creative destruction time

It will be fascinating to watch what Prof. Sergey Karaganov masterfully described, in detail, as the new Putin doctrine of constructive destruction , and how it will interconnect with West Asia, the Eastern Mediterranean and further on down the Global South road.

President Erdogan, the ceremonial NATO Sultan, branded the recognition of the Baby Twins as “unacceptable.” No wonder: that definitely smashed all his elaborate plans to pose as privileged mediator between Moscow and Kiev during Putin’s upcoming visit to Ankara. The Kremlin – as well as the Foreign Ministry – don’t waste time talking to NATO minions.

Lavrov, for his part, had a recent, very productive entente with Syrian Foreign Minister Faysal Mekdad. Russia, this past weekend, has staged a spectacular strategic missile display, hypersonic and otherwise, featuring Khinzal, Zircon, Kalibr, Yars ICBMs, Iskander and Sineva – irony of ironies, in synch with the Russophobia-fest in Munich. In parallel, Russian Navy ships of the Pacific, Northern and Black Sea fleets performed a series of submarine search drills in the Mediterranean.

The Putin doctrine privileges the asymmetrical – and that applies to the near abroad and beyond. Putin’s body language, in his last two crucial interventions, spell out nearly maximum exasperation. As in realizing, not auspiciously, but rather in resignation, that the only language those neo-con and “humanitarian” imperialist psychos in the Beltway understand is heavy meal thunder (they are definitely deaf, dumb and blind to History, Geography and Diplomacy, for that matter. No to mention they never accepted their defeat in Syria.)

So we can always game the Russian military, for instance, imposing a no-fly zone in Syria to conduct a series of visits by Mr. Khinzal not only to the Turk-protected shady jihadist umbrella in Idlib but also the jihadists protected by the Americans in Al-Tanf base, near the Syria-Jordan border. After all these specimens are all NATO proxies.

The United States government barks non-stop about “territorial sovereignty”. So let’s game the Kremlin asking the White House for a road map on getting out of Syria: after all the Americans are illegally occupying a section of Syrian territory and most of all adding extra disaster to the Syrian economy by stealing their oil.

NATO’s stultifying Stoltenberg has announced the alliance is dusting off its “defense plans”: that may include little more than hide behind their expensive Brussels desks. They are as inconsequential in the Black Sea as in the East Med – as the Empire remains quite vulnerable in Syria.

There are now four Russian TU-22M3 strategic bombers in Hymeimim base, each capable of carrying three S-32 anti-ship missiles that fly at supersonic Mach 4.3 with a range of 1,000 km. No Aegis system is able to handle them.

Russia in Syria also has stationed a few Mig-31Ks in Latakia equipped with hypersonic Khinzals – more than enough to sink any kind of US surface group, including aircraft carriers, in the East Med. The US has no air defense mechanism whatsoever with even a minimal chance of intercepting them.

So the rules have changed. Drastically. The Hegemon is naked. The new deal starts with turning the post-Cold War set-up in Eastern Europe completely upside down. The East Med will be next. The Bear is back, baby. Hear him roar.

Read more:

https://www.unz.com/pescobar/from-the-black-sea-to-the-east-med-dont-poke-the-russian-bear/

READ FROM TOP.

see also: 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!