untitled design

Analysis: Putin tries to raise stakes in Ukraine; see what it means

In a speech fraught with threats, like his declaration of a “special military operation” against Ukraine in February, President Vladimir Putin declared a partial mobilization of Russian citizens to help a staggering military campaign.

Seven months later, the language Putin uses is even more somber than in the early hours of that February 24th. At the time, he warned the West that Russia would respond immediately to those who stood in its way, with consequences “like you have never seen in your entire history.”

In his last speech, broadcast this Wednesday (21), he gave even more substance to that threat. “The territorial integrity of our homeland, our independence and freedom will be ensured, and I will emphasize this again, with all the means at our disposal. Those who try to blackmail us with nuclear weapons should know that the prevailing winds can turn in their direction,” he said.

The Russian leader has dramatically upped the ante — just as Russia embarks on a hasty process to expand what constitutes this “motherland” through hastily organized referendums in occupied territories that are intended to absorb parts of Ukraine for Russia: Donetsk, Lugansk, much of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.

The announcement of these referendums on Tuesday (20) was sudden and synchronized. The idea that they could be organized within a few days in areas where hostilities continue is preposterous, especially since some officials in those areas have proposed delaying votes to join Russia until security conditions improve. Equally absurd is the notion that accession to Russia came spontaneously from the territories.

But that’s not the point. Matthew Schmidt, an associate professor of national security and political science at the University of New Haven, said Putin is using the referendums to justify the mobilization.

Putin has two audiences in mind. Anatol Lieven, director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute, explained that Putin wants to “persuade the United States and/or the Europeans to get serious about negotiating an agreement to end the war, showing that otherwise Russia will take action.” radically intensified that will not only force the West to scale back, but will rule out any possibility of peace for a long time to come.”

Alexander Baunov of Carnegie Endowment commented bluntly. In a series of tweets before Putin’s speech, he wrote that the message to Ukraine’s allies is as follows: “you chose to fight us in Ukraine, now try to fight us in Russia, or to be more precise, in what we call Russia”.

Schmidt stated that Putin’s main audience is the national one. According to him, the Russian leader is trying to regain the initiative and harden the morale of the Russian population. The president may also be hoping for a jump in his popularity, similar to the broad public support seen in relation to Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014. “Mobilization is not a military decision, but a way of trying to control the narrative about the war , which he realizes he is missing,” he told CNN .

Against the backdrop of the bad news coming from the front lines, Schmidt observed, “the morale of the public is the morale of the army.”

“Putin has to say that great Russia is under attack. He has a really hard time selling that, and that puts his leadership under a lot of pressure,” added Schmidt.

Baunov believes the aim is to turn the Russian invasion of a neighboring country into a defensive war, a distinction that “would make the conflict more legitimate in the eyes of ordinary Russians, leaving the Kremlin free to make whatever decisions and measures it deems necessary.”

But mobilization is a huge risk, warned Schmidt. It takes time to train, equip, organize – and nothing is done to improve Russia’s greatest shortcomings.

Big challenges for Russian recruits

Moscow faces the same huge logistical obstacles that have thwarted the last six months of war. Its forces suffered so many material losses that, according to US officials, the Russian Defense Ministry turned to North Korea for ammunition. Its latest setback in northeastern Ukraine, in Kharkiv, has left some of its elite tank units severely handicapped.

The “partial mobilization” announced by Putin also appears to rely on parts of the Russian population that would have already felt strong pressure to sign up for Russia’s faltering war effort.

Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said about 300,000 reservists would be available.

“These are not people who have never heard of the army,” Shoigu commented. “These are people who have served, who have a military specialty, a military experience.”

Mobilization is limited, perhaps so as not to alienate public opinion, or perhaps to leave room for new movements in the future. Shoigu stated, “those who have served and have a military specialty are nearly 25 million.”

Both Putin and Shoigu spoke specifically about a reservation call — but the decree doesn’t just apply to that group. It allows for “conscription of citizens of the Russian Federation to military service through mobilization into the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation”.

But Russia’s reliance on Chechen units, volunteer battalions, Luhansk and Donetsk militias, and even convicts recruited by the Russian private military company Wagner Group belies the claim that there is a supply of veterans ready to go to the front lines.

The mobilization “will not provide young, trained officers who can lead assault operations against an army that has been fighting for more than 3,000 days,” Schmidt told CNN referring to Ukraine’s conflict with Russian-backed separatists in the Donbass region since 2014, nor will it change a culture that has struggled against Ukrainian adaptability.

nuclear movement

Putin could not have made a more serious gamble by referring directly to nuclear weapons, but observers are not convinced he would, or even could, go along with such a threat, though he insists he is not bluffing.

In June 2020, he signed a decree updating Russia’s nuclear doctrine that requires full citation. “The Russian Federation retains the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear weapons and other types of weapons of mass destruction against the country and/or its allies.”

But that sentence ends with an unusual statement: “and also in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the State is jeopardized”.

Lieven of the Quincy Institute said it was impossible to say whether Putin would accept the use of tactical nuclear weapons, but “it seems doubtful that Russia will use them unless Crimea itself is in danger of falling”.

So far, Lieven has commented to the CNN “Putin’s strategies have failed overwhelmingly, both in terms of military progress on the ground, and in terms of economic pressure on the West to seek a deal with Russia.”

However, he added, “Russia retains the means for serious escalation without nuclear weapons – notably, the destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure and the assassination of the Ukrainian leadership.”

Schmidt also believes there is little risk of Putin resorting to tactical nuclear weapons, “because that would really involve the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and he would lose the Russian military, the source of his power.”

And while Putin was specific in saying that partial mobilization would be used to defend newly occupied areas, he did not choose to extend his nuclear threat to the same broadened idea of ​​what Russia might consider its territory in the future.

But the very mention of these nuclear weapons is obviously designed to complicate the enemy’s calculations.

For some observers, the formal absorption of parts of Ukraine by the Russian Federation risks making any negotiation to end the conflict in Ukraine – however distant it may seem – almost impossible.

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday that once the republics are integrated into the Russian Federation, “no future leader of Russia, no official will be able to reverse these decisions”.

However, Schmidt points out that Medvedev is a surrogate, not the source of authority — and that both sides have taken maximalist positions that could eventually be adapted or replaced through negotiation. Such a moment, however, seems further away than ever.

So far, of course, the Russian government has not said that it will officially recognize the results of the referendum. But it would be extraordinary if an apparently synchronized and organized process in Moscow were rejected in Moscow itself. The referendum organized in Crimea in 2014 was ratified by Russian lawmakers within a week.

Whether regarding the timing of the offensive against Ukraine (and indeed whether there was one), its ultimate goals, the use of natural gas and oil as a political weapon, and even the possible use of nuclear weapons to protect the homeland, Putin has always been guided by a desire to keep his opponents off balance.

This last maneuver is true to form. It likely eliminates any hope that this war will soon end, but it also demonstrates that Putin’s options are narrowing in the face of military shortcomings that defy any quick fix. As knowledge of the magnitude of the losses grows, the Russian president will have to match it with a corresponding magnitude of action.

Source: CNN Brasil

You may also like

Get the latest

Stay Informed: Get the Latest Updates and Insights

 

Most popular