Author: M Barbu

Russia’s Invasion Could Unleash Forces the Kremlin Can’t Control

Russian forces have struck targets across Ukraine and seized key facilities and swaths of territory. The Ukrainian military is no match for this Russian juggernaut. Although some reports suggest Ukrainian troops have rebuffed attacks in certain parts of the country, it seems more likely that Russian President Vladimir Putin will decide just how far Russia goes into Ukraine. As a retired Russian-speaking CIA operations officer who served in Central Asia and managed agency counterinsurgency operations, I did not think Putin would have attacked Ukraine unless he had already devised a reliable end game, given the costs of an intractable conflict. But Putin’s best-laid plans might easily unravel in the face of popular Ukrainian national resistance and an insurgency.

How Sergey Shoygu Paved the Way for Russia’s Ukraine Assault

On February 25, barely 24 hours after Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russian forces reached Kyiv. Even accounting for Russia’s vastly superior firepower, the speed of the military advance has been startling. But it also has highlighted something else: the extent to which the Kremlin’s entire pressure campaign on Ukraine has been driven by the Russia military. In contrast to many previous efforts by Moscow to achieve political goals in the West—or to exact retribution on a perceived enemy—the Ukraine offensive has not been driven by the Federal Security Service (FSB), Russia’s security agency, which has often drawn the lion’s share of Western attention. Instead, it has been shaped from the outset by old-fashioned military power projection: first by amassing an overwhelming force on the border and then, with the world watching, quickly and efficiently putting that force to use.

Dictatorships Look Stable—Until They Aren’t

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s attack on Ukraine has been a clarifying moment. Since he came to power in 2000, various Western leaders have tried to cooperate, accommodate, or negotiate with him. But by embarking on a war of choice against a country he claims doesn’t have a right to exist, Putin has forced the international community to see him for what he is: a belligerent leader with a remarkable capacity for destruction. The result has been sweeping new measures designed to constrict and constrain him—punishing sanctions against Russia’s financial institutions, bans on Russian planes over EU airspace, and increased weapons shipments to Ukraine. Even Germany, long reluctant to confront Putin, agreed to exclude Russian banks from the SWIFT financial messaging system, reversed its long-standing prohibition on providing arms to conflict zones, and substantially increased its military spending. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has sparked nothing less than a sea change in international perceptions of Putin and what must be done to confront him.

A Defeat for Moscow Won’t Be a Clear Victory for the West

Russian President Vladimir Putin has made a strategic blunder by invading Ukraine. He has misjudged the political tenor of the country, which was not waiting to be liberated by Russian soldiers. He has misjudged the United States, the European Union, and a number of countries—including Australia, Japan, Singapore, and South Korea—all of which were capable of collective action before the war and all of which are now bent on Russia’s defeat in Ukraine. The United States and its allies and partners are imposing harsh costs on Moscow. Every war is a battle for public opinion, and Putin’s war in Ukraine has—in an age of mass-media imagery—associated Russia with an unprovoked attack on a peaceful neighbor, with mass humanitarian suffering, and with manifold war crimes. At every turn, the ensuing outrage will be an obstacle to Russian foreign policy in the future.

With signs that Moscow’s initial invasion strategy has not gone according to plan, the crisis in Ukraine has reached a critical moment.

It has not been a good five days for Vladimir Putin. Ukrainian resistance has been much stronger and more effective than he could have imagined. His own forces have been much less effective, sometimes almost absurdly so. And he has awakened a united Western response which none of us could have imagined would happen until very recently.

Putin’s decision to elevate the alert status of Russia’s nuclear forces is both a signal of how much Ukraine means to the Russian leader, and a deterrent against future Western actions. European allies must continue to present a unified response, while also exploring opportunities for de-escalation.

An assault on Kyiv will be bloody for both sides. But for the civilian population it will be devastating.

It is only a matter of time before Russian forces reach and complete the encirclement of Kyiv. Russian armoured units have advanced to the northern outskirts of the city, while satellite images show a build-up of 150 attack and transport helicopters in southern Belarus, less than a 100 miles from Kyiv, and large military convoys on their way to the capital. Although there has been confusion regarding the invasion aims, a consensus is emerging among Western officials and commentators that Russian forces will probably seek to secure key government administrative buildings and remove Ukraine’s incumbent government.

As the fighting in Ukraine intensifies in its largest cities, fears are rising that a war of attrition will mean an escalation of violence and the use of ever more deadly weapons.

On Saturday, a CNN correspondent captured footage of what appeared to be a TOS-1 heavy flamethrower system being transported to the Ukrainian border near the Russian city of Belgorod.

The head of Roscosmos, the Russian space agency, has suggested that the International Space Station (ISS) could fall out of orbit and crash into the United States or Europe as a result of sanctions on Russia.

The comments came following US president Joe Biden’s announcement of new sanctions that “will degrade their [Russia’s] aerospace industry, including their space programme”.