Despite the build-up of troops on the Ukrainian border, Russia’s invasion of the world came suddenly. The most obvious goal, experts say, is to defeat the Ukrainian army and overthrow the government.
Sanctions, and the threat thereof, have not been able to change Putin’s mind. Were we naive about Putin’s plans? What moves him and what else is he up to?
–
“
This is a turning point in world history. Russia is now an enemy.
–
–
“I don’t think Putin wants to and can occupy the whole country, he doesn’t have the people for that,” said Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, former secretary general of NATO and former minister of Foreign Affairs. news hour† Putin wants a government in Kiev that will listen to him completely, he thinks, although “it will not be so easy for him to set up a club there that dances to his tune. Ukrainian President Zelensky has many people around him who support him.”
Putin hopes to bring Ukraine to its knees with the air strikes and other swift military actions, says Eastern Europe expert Bob Deen. “He wants the country to meet his demands quickly. But we have seen a militant Zelensky asking the people the to take up arms.”
This image shows where airstrikes and other shelling took place today:
–
US
– –
De Hoop Scheffer fears that the conflict could escalate further, even to NATO countries. “Putin is resentful and vindictive. He says anyone who dares to do something against me will face weapons and violence that the world has not yet seen. That is an undisguised threat of nuclear weapons. I would rather deal with a calculable dictator have than with an incalculable.”
Relentless violence in Syria
Has the West misjudged Putin? General retired and former NATO commander Mart de Kruif thinks so. “We thought: there is a difference between what he can do and what he does. We will scare him. But we didn’t scare him, we didn’t succeed.”
Former American ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder believes that the West has been naive about Russia for much longer. “Russia has a much stronger army than at the turn of the century. We should have had a firmer response when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. We should have helped the Ukrainians more.”
But Europe and the US were too divided: should they approach Russia and keep the dialogue open, or was deterrence necessary? Daalder: “Some countries wanted the latter and in hindsight they may have been right.”
“Putin has a history of brutal violence,” continues De Hoop Scheffer. “He has bombed hospitals and schools in Syria. That is how he grew up and that is how he is now carrying out his plan.”
–
“
You see a maddened president Putin who seems to have lost touch with reality.
–
–
Still, the former NATO boss does not think that the West has misjudged Russia’s plans lately. “The Americans deliberately leaked intelligence to show how serious the threat was. You can’t say we were naive. We were hoping it wouldn’t happen.”
Moreover, the West could not have done much against Putin, emphasizes De Hoop Scheffer. “We are not going to go to war with Russia because of other countries where Putin wants to have exclusive influence.”
Alexander Vindman, a former member of the US National Security Council and a native of Ukraine, believes that we could have taken Ukraine and the threat from Russia more seriously. “Putin gradually threatened European security and there was not enough response. Ukraine must in any case be equipped with antiaircraft guns to make it difficult for the Russians.”
Resentment over NATO expansion
Not only did the West not take Putin’s threats seriously enough, but also his wishes, said Laurien Crump, assistant professor of the history of international relations. “Putin does not want NATO to advance further east. For the Russians, NATO is still the alliance created to keep the Russians out.”
After the fall of the Berlin Wall, “Russia received verbal assurances that NATO would not expand further east after the rejoining of East Germany”. The US Secretary of State told Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 that NATO would move “not an inch” east. That commitment was never formally made, but “from Russia’s perspective, the West has failed to deliver on this promise,” Crump said. Because eventually all the former Eastern Bloc countries joined to NATOexcept Russia itself.
But, Crump emphasizes, “that in no way justifies his attacking Ukraine.” Daalder also says: the West may have acted naively, but “the war has not been provoked and completely the choice of Russia”.
Nieuwsuur reporter Gert-Jan Dennekamp travels from Eastern Ukraine to the west. Along the way, he speaks to citizens about the Russian invasion:
–
video-player"> —-
When the Russian troops invade your country
– –
Crump: “This is a blatant invasion of Ukraine’s sovereignty. You see a maddened President Putin who seems out of touch with reality.”
De Hoop Scheffer agrees. And therein lies his fear. “He is completely unpredictable. That is a big risk.”
He does not rule out the possibility that Putin will steam on to NATO countries in Eastern Europe after Ukraine. “It is not likely. But he is unpredictable and is consumed with resentment and rancor. Then you cannot exclude that he creates a problem between Kaliningrad and Belarus. That area is the entrance to the Baltic countries from Western Europe. If he passage, that would be grounds for war for NATO.”
Putin is looking for our weakness
Daalder is also concerned that Putin is not just about Ukraine. “I fear that the search for weakness, which Putin is doing, will extend into NATO territory.”
“This is a turning point in world history. Russia is now an enemy. We must ensure that Putin’s plans fail.”
