Posts Tagged ‘Putin’

Ukraine: One Year In And It’s 1915 All Over Again

Friday, February 24th, 2023

This morning, politicians, diplomats, generals, and just plain folks all over Europe and America are asking the same questions: Where do we go from here and how do we get there?

One year ago today, Vladimir Putin launched his Blitzkrieg invasion of Ukraine. It failed to capture the capital Kyiv. This is reminiscent of the German invasion of neutral Belgium on 3 August 1914. Germany’s plan called for an all out sprint through Belgium to capture Paris and defeat France before the French could mobilize their defense. Although the Germans made it to 90 miles from Paris, they never got there, and following an August filled with German atrocities, the arrival of the British to join the slaughter, French counterattacks, and the absolute refusal of America to become involved, everyone settled in for four years of trench warfare, where millions of rounds of artillery shelling bracketed wave after wave of soldiers insanely charging across “no man’s land,” to capture a few feet of ground they would lose the next day.

It wasn’t until 1917 when the discovery of the Zimmermann Telegram¹ gave President Woodrow Wilson the excuse he needed to bring America into the war that the tide began to turn leading to Germany’s surrender in November, 1918. The Versailles Treaty that followed completely changed the world’s political geography and furnished the political ammunition that led to Adolph Hitler and the Second World War.

The trench systems on the Western Front in World War 1 were roughly 475 miles long, stretching from the English Channel to the Swiss Alps, although not in a continuous line. In Ukraine today, the battle line extends about 600 miles, and the Russians are dug in all along it. The trench system they have built is formidable. The two sides exchange artillery constantly, while Russia periodically fires more Cruise Missiles into Ukrainian cities. The ones Ukrainians fail to shoot down kill more civilians and destroy more infrastructure. That’s the whole point of them.

No one, I mean absolutely nobody, knows how the current war in Ukraine will end. What we can say is what most observers thought would happen a year ago hasn’t. One year ago, I wrote:

Ukrainian troops are fighting valiantly, as did so many in Hitler’s way in 1939, but, as with those long ago heroic defenders, they fight alone and their cause is hopeless. True, they will make Putin pay a high cost in Russian blood, but it seems inevitable that Kyiv will fall. Putin will decapitate the government, assassinate the leaders he can find, install a puppet regime, declare Ukraine restored to its rightful place in the arms of Mother Russia, and that will be that.

Like everyone else, I was wrong, but happily so. Still…

British and American Intelligence agencies think around 200,000 Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded over the last year. That includes thousands of the infamous Wagner mercenary group, financed by wealthy catering tycoon, ex-convict, and all around Russian loose cannon Yevgeniy Prigozhin. He enlisted thirty to forty thousand convicts from Russian prisons, and then used them as cannon fodder, which is one reason he’s having difficulty getting any more prisoners to trade their cells for an extremely remote chance of staying alive long enough to get a taste of  freedom. The Wagner group, however, does have around 15,000 actual soldiers experienced in small squad tactics, but, despite all the press their leader has garnered, “they have played only a minor role in the war thus far,” according to Michael Kofman, the Russian studies Research Program Director at the Center for Naval Analysis.

Despite far-right congressional Republican opposition here at home to aiding Ukraine, up to this point the United States has succeeded in keeping NATO and the European Union united in resisting Putin’s immoral, illegal, and savage aggression. The western powers have levied economic sanctions and provided a vast amount of military aid. Thus far, the sanctions have hurt the Russian economy, but not its defense industrial production; Iran and North Korea have stepped in to restock Russian shelves with armaments, but that supply will eventually run out like toilet paper during the pandemic. Which is why Putin is turning to China and the Global South, particularly Africa and India, which has increased its importation of Russian crude oil by a factor of more than seven since the conflict began. Much of the Global South sees America as an Imperialist power and will not join in sanctioning Russia.

The U.S. has, over the last couple of weeks, repeatedly warned China not to provide “lethal” aid to Russia, but China is in a difficult position. It desperately wants Russia not to lose the war, because if that happened America and the West would assume even more global domination. The problem is China has a vast supply of ammunition and other armaments, and Russia needs them, but China would risk significant economic and diplomatic harm by providing them.

Right now, Russia has begun its long-awaited winter offensive, without much success to this point. It’s anticipated that the Ukrainian plan is to ward off this Russian attack and then begin its own spring offensive when it might have more and better western armaments to throw into the fight.

Meanwhile, back in Russia, Putin, who has been planning this invasion for more than a decade, has finished consolidating his power. Elite Russians who vociferously opposed the war at its beginning have left the country; the people who stayed have gladly swallowed the propaganda. The independent press, that is, what was left of it before the invasion, has been eviscerated. Ditto to his political opponents, who have all been jailed. Even Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, head of the Russian Orthodox Church is a strident supporter. The result is that Putin is, quite literally, preaching to his choir.

And he seems more than ever in for the long haul, believing he can actually outlast the opposition, in that western unity will over time crack apart like Humpty Dumpty’s egg.

At the one-year anniversary of this barbaric war, we should ask the question: What if that happens? What if western support slowly goes away?

Here’s a scenario hard to contemplate. Most experts now agree this is a multi-year war; it’s a long slog. Less than two years from now America holds a presidential election. If a far-right-leaning, Russia-tolerating Republican wins that election (it happened in 2016³) with a platform saying the war has cost America far too much, we should now get out, and the Ukrainians should fight it out by themselves, the entire European and Ukrainian picture could change. It’s hard to imagine this happening, but without U.S. leadership, Russia and its stone-cold-killer² president would then have license to hold nothing back.

Another scenario. What if western unity remains strong? What if a staunch Ukrainian independence supporter wins our presidential election and Putin realizes the egg will not crack? What if Ukraine pushes Russian forces back to the boundaries of 2014?  What if Putin realizes he is in danger of losing Crimea, which, as opposed to a year aqo, President Zelenskyy now says is a solid goal Ukraine will achieve?

Would Putin then think it was time for a tactical nuclear strike? Would he be that crazy? What would China do then?

What would we do?

So many questions with not an answer in sight.

_____________________________

¹ In January 1917, British cryptographers deciphered a telegram from German Foreign Minister Arthur Zimmermann to the German Minister to Mexico, Heinrich von Eckhardt, offering United States territory to Mexico after the war was won in return for joining the German cause.

² Former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates’s term for him.

³ Ask yourself where we’d be, where Ukraine would be, if the Russian invasion had happened on Donald Trump’s watch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tags: , ,
Posted in Ukraine | Comments Off on Ukraine: One Year In And It’s 1915 All Over Again

Once Again History Rhymes

Tuesday, September 6th, 2022

“History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme.” – Mark Twain

In 1870, Germany ended the Franco-Prussian War by decisively defeating the French army in a Battle of Annihilation at Sedan. Germany’s overly greedy and needlessly cruel terms of surrender were excruciating for France and included the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine, a move against which the prescient Bismarck had advised. It became a constant, festering wound in the heart of every French man and woman. From that point on both countries, each of whom knew they would meet again on the battlefield, prepared for the rematch that would become World War I.

Looking at the behavior of one of the two belligerents, Germany, over the next 45 years illuminates and instructs what is happening now more than a century later, as Vladimir Putin, who has been planning the conquest of Ukraine for nearly 20 years, is following the same unsuccessful, potholed road. We can learn a lot from the mistakes of the past. We can, but we don’t.

In the interval between Sedan and 1914, Germany’s Chief of the General Staff, Count Alfred von Schlieffen, devoted his entire tenure (1891 to 1906) to creating what would become the German Plan of Attack. The plan called for a huge, lightning-like strike through Belgium, which would result in the capture of Paris in nearly six weeks, 40 days. But there was a problem: Belgium neutrality, which had been created in 1831 at an international conference in London that recognized Belgium as an independent, neutral state, its neutrality to be guaranteed by the European powers. Forty years later, shortly after the Franco-Prussian War, British Prime Minister Gladstone secured a treaty from France and Germany that if either violated Belgium neutrality England would work with the other defending Belgium, although without engaging in “the general operations of the war.”

Regardless of Belgian neutrality, Schlieffen’s plan devotedly followed the bible of Germany’s war oracle Baron Carl von Clausewitz, who wrote in the time of Waterloo. Clausewitz had ordained a quick victory by “decisive battle” as the primary object of an offensive war, the only kind Germany understood. He advocated the fast capture of the opponent’s capital above all else. Consequently, to conquer France quickly by taking Paris required ignoring Belgium neutrality.

Schlieffen edited and re-edited his plan over the course of his term, and in 1906, when he retired, the plan was complete.  It was exact in every detail, a model of precision, and it factored in every possible contingency.

The only thing it lacked was flexibility. That is, what to do if something went wrong. And many things did. As that great American philosopher Mike Tyson put it, “All your plans go out the window the first time someone punches you in the mouth.”

The Germans invaded Belgium on their way to Paris on 4 August 1914. In addition to misjudging the determination of the French to defend themselves and believing Britain would either stay out completely or join the battle late, Kaiser Wilhelm was certain the puny Belgians would simply roll over and play dead. However, Belgium’s King Albert, the Kaiser’s cousin, had other ideas and refused to follow the plan. In an act of heroic patriotism, he mobilized the Belgium army, primitive though it was, and fought. Belgium resistance disrupted Schlieffen’s precise timetable, and the Germans never did get to Paris. Instead, Germany was forced to settle for four years of trench warfare, attrition and ultimate surrender in November 1918. The terms of surrender forced on Germany were as bad as it had forced on France after Sedan and led to Hitler’s rise and World War II. We never learn.

The German defeat in the first World War can be directly linked to the arrogance and hubris of its leaders in their certainty that King Albert would not object to the invasion of his country by an army an order of magnitude larger and more accomplished than his own. They did not take into consideration the hatred taking Alsace-Lorraine had spawned in the French, or that the British would do the honorable thing and come in on the side of France following the violation of Belgian neutrality. Neither did they appreciate that Russia, a signatory to the treaty for defending Belgium, would mobilize, join the war, and engage the German army weeks before Schlieffen’s plan anticipated.  Schlieffen and the Kaiser, with their myopic tunnel vision, had never believed any of this would happen. They had refused to even contemplate that their perfect plan could be inadequate in any way.

Schlieffen died in January, 1913, and never saw any of the debacle that was to follow. On 9 November 1918, the German high command, two days before the country’s surrender, forced Kaiser Wilhelm to abdicate. He retired to  neutral Netherlands where he lived in isolation for the rest of his life.

In yet another example of history rhyming, even repeating, we are now witnessing a new instance of military and dictatorial myopia. This time in Ukraine where Vladimir Putin, who seems to fancy himself the second coming of Peter the Great, has wildly miscalculated both the tenacity and determination of Ukrainian patriotism and the commitment and unity of NATO members who, like Gladstone’s Britain, are committed to defending Ukraine, although without engaging in “the general operations of the war.”

Here in 2022, we watch King Albert come to life in the actions of President Zelenskyy.

As what happened to Schlieffen’s perfect plan, Putin’s hubris-driven quick victory was not to be. Like the Germans of August 1914, he failed to capture the Ukrainian capital in the early days of the war. Now, he is now facing a long, slow slog as victory ineluctably slips farther away. The recent Ukrainian counterattacks in the South and East are living proof of this.

Thinking about all this stupidity, I can only conclude that Schlieffen, the Kaiser, Putin and others who yearn for conquest always fail to appreciate, and seriously undervalue, the love of homeland coursing through the veins of all of us. History is full of examples that continue to be ignored. America, itself, has fallen victim to this many times, most recently in Afghanistan.

It would be less than fitting, but still desirable, if Putin’s generals would do to him what the German generals did to the Kaiser. But that, I fear, is where history will neither repeat nor rhyme.

 

 

 

Tags: , , ,
Posted in History, Leadership, Ukraine | Comments Off on Once Again History Rhymes

The Saga Continues In You Know Where

Wednesday, March 30th, 2022

Seated in a stately room on two sides of a large table covered with a starched, white tablecloth, looking for all the world like a couple of teams discussing a private equity acquisition, Ukrainian and Russian negotiators are meeting in Turkey to see if there exists anything resembling a face-saving exit ramp for Vladimir Putin, who, more and more, seems to fancy himself the second coming of Ivan The Terrible, the first Tsar of all Russia. Yesterday, the Russian side said it was “drastically” pulling back its troops from Kyiv and Chernihiv  as a demonstration of good will and sincerity by the invaders.  Frankly, I wouldn’t trust those guys (they’re all men) any farther than I could kick Mr. Putin, which I would dearly love to do.

The U.S. and its NATO and European allies are justifiably skeptical. “There is what Russia says and there’s what Russia does,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said. “And what Russia is doing is the continued brutalization of Ukraine and its people and that continues as we speak.” The U.S. Department of Defense has yet to notice much of a pullback.

The recent Ukrainian counter-offensive not only stopped Russian advancement, but also drove back its troops. The invaders are now digging in, demonstrating Russia’s version of 21st century trench warfare.* This puts a period to the utter failure of their remarkably poorly planned and executed blitzkrieg attack. An invasion, a “special military operation,” ( Oh, it was certainly special), that was supposed to last a few days, is now in its second month. On Day 2, in a fit of vainglorious overconfidence, Russian state media accidentally, and rather prematurely, you might say, released, and shortly thereafter retracted, a celebratory victory press release.

After all the killing and destruction, it appears the only things Russia has achieved so far are:

  1. Worldwide condemnation and isolation;
  2. The total destruction of some of the earth’s most beautiful cities;
  3. The evisceration of the Russian economy;
  4. The wanton and callous killing of thousands of Ukrainians and up to an estimated 15,000 Russian soldiers (It took four years for that many American soldiers to be killed in action during the Vietnam War);
  5. The creation of four million refugees;
  6. The first-time-ever, joined at the hip unity and cooperation of NATO, the European Union and the U.S.;
  7. Significantly increased funding by NATO for its defense; and,
  8. The emergence of Ukraine and its heroic President as important players on the World stage.

Other than that, the invasion has been a smashing success for Mr. Putin.

To understand what is driving this insanity and, if you can bear it, peer into the warped mind of Mr. Putin, I recommend reading two long-form essays. The first, The Logic of Vladimir Putin, a New York Times Magazine piece by John Lloyd, written in 2000, the year Putin was first elected President of Russia. The second, another New York Time Magazine article, The Making Of Vladimir Putin, published this week, 22 years after Lloyd’s, by the brilliant Roger Cohen, the Paris Bureau Chief of the Times. Among other things, these two articles prove the truth of Lord Acton’s famous 1887 dictum, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” (If nothing else, the two essays provide solid rationale for term limits in the U.S. Congress and a limit of two terms for presidents).

Reading the two essays makes how we got to where we are actually understandable. I’d go so far as to say Putin is almost a tragic figure in the Shakespearean sense. But that doesn’t change the fact he is has become a walking, talking monster. I’ve always thought it would be nearly impossible for any Russian leader to outdo Stalin in bottom-of-the-soul cruelty, but Mr. Putin is giving it all he has.

Because of Vladimir Putin’s paranoid megalomania, about the only honest thing we can say about how this current lunacy will end is that we have absolutely no idea how it will end.

And so it goes.

*As the great Chad Mitchell Trio put it in 1965, “I want to go back to the days when men were men and start the First World War all over again.” The song, Barry’s Boys, was about Barry Goldwater, but you get the point.

Tags: ,
Posted in Ukraine | Comments Off on The Saga Continues In You Know Where