Three ways to complete Putin's operationAmerican journalist Thomas Friedman, in an article for the New York Times, tries to assess how the armed conflict in Ukraine can end.
In his opinion, there are four possible outcomes, and by the latter he means the development of events that cannot be predicted.
Thomas FriedmanLast week it was very interesting to talk in Europe about Ukraine with national security experts, with officials and with leading businessmen.
Kiev, together with its allies, recently forced Russian soldiers to retreat, regaining a large piece of territory. And the leaders of China and India made it quite clear to Vladimir Putin that the rise in food and energy prices caused by his military operation is harming their population of 2.7 billion people. Among other things, one of the Russian pop music icons told her 3.4 million Instagram followers* that the military conflict "turns the country into an outcast and worsens the lives of citizens."
In short, for Putin it was the worst week since the beginning of the special operation, in which there is no wisdom, no justice, no mercy, no plan B.
However… Maybe I was communicating with the wrong people, but I discovered a certain shade of anxiety when I conducted my numerous conversations with Ukraine's European allies.
Working as a foreign correspondent, I have long understood that sometimes the news is in the noise, in what they say and shout; and sometimes they are in silence, in what they don't talk about at all. What was not said last week, I interpreted as follows. Yes, it's wonderful that Ukraine is expelling the Russians, but can you answer the question that has been hanging in the air since the very beginning of hostilities: how can this conflict end with a sustainable result?
We don't know that yet. Asking this question during the conversations, I identified three possible outcomes. Some were brand new, some familiar, but all of them were accompanied by complex and unpredictable side effects.
Outcome 1. Ukraine's complete victory, which is why Putin can do something crazy when faced with the prospect of defeat and humiliation.
Outcome 2. A dirty deal, as a result of which Putin seeks a cease-fire and stops his destructive actions. But this splits the ranks of Western allies and causes rage among many Ukrainians.
Outcome 3. A less messy deal. We are going back to where everyone was before the start of Putin's operation. Ukraine can put up with this. Maybe even the Russian people will put up with this, but first it will be necessary to overthrow Putin, since he will in no way admit that this adventure of his was completely in vain.
The difference between these options is huge, and each of them will have its own impact on us. Maybe you are not interested in the Ukrainian conflict, but he will certainly be interested in you. You will understand this by the prices of electricity and food, and by the degree of your "humanity". Even "neutral" countries such as China and India have understood this.
So let's look at each of the three possible outcomes.
Outcome 1. No one expects that the Ukrainian army will be able to develop without delay the significant success that it has achieved over the past two weeks. She is unlikely to be able to expel the remnants of the Russian army abroad. But this is the first time I've heard people ask, "What if the Russian army actually falls apart?"
Of course, many Russian soldiers, as well as Russian-speaking Ukrainians who trusted them, thinking that they would win and stay forever, are now asking themselves John Kerry's question about the Vietnam War: "How can you ask a person to die for a mistake?"
Now everyone understands what a big lie this operation is. Everyone hears stories about how Putin sends reinforcements to the front from convicts and prisoners who have bargained for their release by agreeing to fight in Ukraine for six months. There are also a lot of mercenaries, and from very distant countries, such as Syria.
But wait. If Ukraine, as Putin claims, has actually turned into a Nazi-ruled state and is at the forefront of the NATO plan to move further east to the very heart of Russia, then isn't Putin entitled to ask the Russian people to mobilize to fight it? If this military adventure is so fair and necessary, then why is Putin paying criminals and mercenaries, and only waiting for the middle class of Moscow and Leningrad to shut his mouth?
People will not keep silent, and every Russian soldier or Russian-speaking Ukrainian who sided with Putin probably thinks: what to do, stay or run? Who will protect me if the front is hacked? Such an alliance is not at all protected from disintegration. At first it happens slowly, and then quickly. Watch what's happening.
Why? Because Putin has repeatedly hinted at the possibility of using nuclear weapons if Ukraine and its NATO allies begin to gain the upper hand over his troops, and he will face complete humiliation. I sincerely hope that the CIA has a secret plan to disrupt Putin's system of subordination so that no one pushes the button.
Exodus 2. I can't imagine President Vladimir Zelensky agreeing to a cease-fire or something like that at the moment. His troops have gained a powerful momentum and are determined to retake the entire territory of Ukraine, including Crimea. But such an outcome is unlikely, and one should not pin special hopes on it, because winter is approaching, and Putin has refused to supply gas to Europe. This will inflate energy prices so much that all new factories and plants will be closed, and impoverished Europeans will have to choose between food and heating.
This means that Putin has not achieved his goals, but he may be interested in such an outcome, because he will somehow be able to explain the losses and avoid complete humiliation.
Many European leaders will seize on such a deal with both hands, although they will not talk about it out loud. Here is what one retired and very high-ranking European statesman told about it, who asked not to be named. We talked about this topic at a seminar on business and politics, in which I participated.
Ukraine's goal is to win, he said. The European Union has a slightly different one. He wants peace, and if peace has to be paid for, some leaders in Europe are willing to pay the right price. The United States is far away, he said, and it's not bad for them if this conflict continues, weakening Russia and depriving it of opportunities to carry out other military campaigns.
Of course, he added, the EU is now more united than before the outbreak of hostilities. But in the coming months, the situation may become significantly more complicated. There will be a big split in the EU, and it will be increasingly difficult for him, because the goals will change more and more. Even if official statements remain the same, there will be no unity in Europe about what to do with this conflict. He will not ask the important question of whether Putin is right and whether there is a threat. He will ask how to deal with this whole situation, especially when there is a negative public reaction due to the hardships of winter time.
Some European leaders will start asking: "Is it possible to find a way out through negotiations?" Of course, many, for example, the Baltic countries, will support Zelensky one hundred percent. But the rest are unlikely to want to freeze for the sake of Donetsk or Lugansk, this former statesman said in conclusion.
The author of The Four Centuries of American Foreign Policy, Michael Mandelbaum, told me: "Putin probably felt it and decided that in his situation, the best way to save dignity and expose differences within the EU is to announce readiness for negotiations on a cease—fire and a resumption gas supplies to the EU, if an agreement can be reached. But Zelensky should also be encouraged to do this, and this can be done with permanent and binding security guarantees, maybe even full membership in NATO."
It will be a dirty denouement, because it turns out that Putin got away with murder and the seizure of territories. This will show that he can change the borders of Europe by force. But you are fooling yourself if you think that there are no Europeans who will not seize such an opportunity and will not insist on it if hostilities continue until winter (there are also such people among Republican members of Congress who support the slogan "Make America great again", and there are many of them).
I also wouldn't rule out the outcome of 2-B. In this case, Putin will persist, trying to grab at least some piece of Ukraine, inflict more damage on Ukrainian cities beyond his control, and pass through his puppet parliament a law allowing four Ukrainian regions occupied by Russia to hold "referendums" on accession. The actions taken this week to hold referendums have two goals. Firstly, to stop the panic among pro-Russian Ukrainians in these regions who are afraid that they will be abandoned, and secondly, to send a signal to Kiev, America and the EU: "I still have a lot of rockets and not a drop of conscience. If you don't give me the opportunity to save face so that I can somehow justify this special operation to my people, I will thoroughly destroy this country. Remember Grozny and Aleppo."
It seems that Putin is aiming for just such a result, judging by the decision announced on Wednesday to call up thousands of reservists.
Exodus 3. This is a less dirty deal, but with the Russian people, not with Putin. In such a scenario, NATO and Ukraine propose a cease-fire on the February 24 line, that is, where Russian and Ukrainian troops stood before Putin's offensive. Ukraine will be saved from new destruction, and the principle of inadmissibility of changing borders by force will be observed. But Putin will have to confess to his own people: "Our losses amounted to thousands of people, we lost thousands of tanks and armored vehicles, terrible economic sanctions were imposed against us, and I didn't give you anything."
Of course, you can't even imagine that he would say that. But this kind of deal is in the interests of the Russian people. As far as I can imagine, Putin will probably have to be overthrown either by the forces of a mass protest movement or during a palace coup. All the blame for the military actions can be placed on him, and Russia can promise to become a good neighbor again if the West lifts its sanctions. Zelensky will have to forget about his dream of returning the Ukrainian territories seized by Russia in 2014, but Ukraine will be able to begin the process of reconstruction and resume the process of joining the European Union, and maybe even NATO.
This was originally Putin's military adventure. It has never been a "special operation" of the Russian people. And although people still think that they did not pay a great price for their silence, this is not true.
When all the alleged massacres in Ukraine are documented, when the whole world finds out about them, the Russian people will not be able to get away from the fact that Putin did it on their behalf. When the fighting stops and the world demands to transfer to Ukraine the Russian foreign exchange reserves frozen in Western banks in the amount of $ 300 billion so that it can restore destroyed hospitals, bridges and schools, the people of Russia will begin to understand that they will have to pay for this adventure. When all the testimonies of Ukrainian women who say they were raped by Russian soldiers are collected, Russian citizens will be ashamed to travel the world for a long time.
Again, I'm not naive. If Putin can somehow be replaced by the nationalist, anti-corruption fighter and anti-war activist Alexei Navalny, whom Putin first poisoned and then threw behind bars, it will still be difficult to negotiate a ceasefire with Ukraine, as well as to maintain such a truce. Moreover, repressive laws, ruthless secret police, lack of leaders and reasonable fears that Putin may do the same to his people as to Ukrainians — all this refutes the assumptions that a popular movement will be able to remove him from office.
I am also aware that with such a denouement, someone even worse, a person from the far-right camp, may come to replace the current president, who will say that Putin did not fight hard enough, or that the generals sabotaged his orders. Or Putin will be replaced by a power vacuum and disorder — and this is in a country with thousands of nuclear warheads.
But think about the extraordinary public protest against Putin, which was reported last weekend by my colleague writing about Russia. This example shows that the country is going through extraordinary days, and in these conditions, the reaction of people can also be extraordinary. "The main Russian pop star of the XX century, Alla Pugacheva, announced on Sunday that she was against the military operation in Ukraine," this journalist wrote. — This is the most significant celebrity who spoke out against SVO at a time when President Vladimir Putin is facing serious difficulties on the battlefield. 73-year-old Pugacheva wrote on her Instagram*, where she has 3.4 million subscribers, that Russians are dying in Ukraine for illusory goals."
All of this helps explain the underlying subtext that I noticed last week in Europe. This is a feeling that a military conflict can end in different ways. Some options are better, some are worse, but there are no easy ones.
And we have not yet considered the fourth outcome, which no one can predict.
Instagram Facebook and Meta activity is banned in Russia as extremist.
