How's Putin Doing?

It seems he’s doing pretty well. The substance of events is largely behind the scenes, with small but telltale glimpses in public statements. The bottom line is that Putin appears to be making significant progress in reshaping the global security environment in so far as they affect Russian interests. That means, above all, on Russia’s western borders.

I’m not, overall, a huge Pat Buchanan fan. However, his assessment of where things stand strike me as realistic and insightful:

Has Putin Won Round One in Ukraine?

Skipping to near the end of Buchanan’s article, he frames the basic issues in a way not often seen in US media—including the Russia viewpoint:

Putin does not threaten any vital interest of the United States and does not want war with the United States. But, as a great power, Russia claims a right to secure, peaceful and friendly borders, free of military alliances designed to circumscribe, contain and control it.

And the protests Moscow is making are not without validity.

Now that the Soviet Empire is dead, the Soviet Union is dead. Communism is dormant, and the USSR has devolved into 15 nations; why did we move our Cold War alliance onto Moscow's front porch?

Would we tolerate this?

For what is "NATO enlargement," other than a lengthening series of U.S. war guarantees to fight Russia on behalf of nations farther and farther away from us, and of ever-diminishing importance to the United States?

…

Can we not understand the rising rage in Moscow as we convert all its former Warsaw Pact allies and ex-republics of the USSR into member states of a military alliance established to contain and control Russia?

Let me put this another way. It’s not really so much about whether or not we approve of Russia’s governance and societal order—after all, if we’re honest, there are some highly objectionable aspects to American governance and societal order. The real issue is about being smart. It’s a fair question whether US post Cold War policy toward Russia has been smart. Forget events of a decade or two ago, was it smart to overthrow the elected government of Ukraine—historically never a truly independent nation, and part of Russia for easily 300 years—and install a corrupt puppet regime? Right next door to Russia, and then suggest that Ukraine would become part of an anti-Russian military alliance. In strictly Realpolitik terms, that would only have been a smart thing to do if we could actually get away with it—and recent events suggest we overreached in a significant way.

How do we know this? Buchanan offers a tell:

Biden was saying Americans are not going to fight Russians in Ukraine, even to protect or extract imperiled U.S. troops, diplomats or citizens.

Speaking last week on the Senate floor, Sen. Ted Cruz echoed Biden: "I want to be clear and unequivocal. ... Under no circumstances should we send our sons and daughters to die to defend Ukraine from Russia."

The question the Biden and Cruz comments immediately raise?

Has not Russian President Vladimir Putin pretty much already realized his principal goal in this crisis -- that Ukraine never become a member of NATO?

That’s a fair question, and the fair answer is: Yes, Putin has “pretty much already realized his principal goal.” Don’t ask what goal Ted Cruz has realized, beyond demonstrating that he’s living in the past and has demonstrated why he is not ready to lead. Echoing Zhou is not a good look for a guy who has presidential aspirations—what was he thinking?

For if Biden and Cruz are unwilling to send U.S. troops to Ukraine to repel Russian invaders, how could the U.S. bring Ukraine into NATO, where, under Article 5, it would be both our moral and legal obligation to do so?

After meeting with Putin, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said of Ukraine's admission to NATO: "Everyone must step back a bit here and make it clear to themselves that we just can't have a possible military conflict over a question that is not on the agenda."

The Germans seem to be saying Ukraine's membership in NATO is not even on the table for discussion and decision. It is a nonissue.

So will Zhou now cancel NordStream2 over the heads of the Germans. I don’t think so. The US is losing—and not smartly—on multiple fronts. But no mean tweets.

Now, you might ask: OK, we’re not sending troops to Ukraine, but maybe we’ll be sending, say, missiles? Not so much of that, either. Ray McGovern, a former CIA analyst, maintains:

A Major Concession Was Buried In All The Shrill US-Russia Back & Forth

…

Putin at the presser with Scholz:

"… as [Lavrov] reported yesterday, the [US and NATO] responses still contain a number of considerations that we are not only ready to discuss but that we have actually suggested to our partners over the years. I am referring to our proposals on European security, certain weapons systems, notably, intermediate and shorter-range missiles, and military transparency. We are ready to continue this joint work. … [Emphasis added.]

So far, the NYT has omitted that statement by Putin, which, coming together with the troop pullback, is highly significant. That the Times "forgot" to include it is yet another sign that even the most sensible, rudimentary negotiations on key matters of concern to Russia will be resisted tooth and nail by the MICIMATT (Military-Industrial-Congressional-MEDIA-Academia-Think-Tank) complex in which the NYT is right there in the middle, the fulcrum – the key "M."

Still, some Times editor apparently insisted on slipping in the important acknowledgment by Mr. Biden that:

"Neither the US or NATO have missiles in Ukraine. We do not, do not have plans to put them there as well." [Emphasis added.]

Ankit Panda @nktpnd

"Top House Republicans are urging President Joe Biden to reject calls from Russia and China to limit U.S. deployments of intermediate-range and short-range ground-based missiles in Europe and the Pacific region"

defensenews.comTop Republicans urge Biden to reject Russia, China demands on missile deployments“We are gravely concerned that any attempt to resurrect the INF Treaty or reimpose limitations on ground-launched missiles would catastrophically undermine American national security, encourage Russian aggression, and advance a flawed view of security that sacrifices peace and stability in the Indo-…

Biden made this commitment to Putin during the telephone call of Dec. 30 that Putin had urgently requested. It amounts to a major concession and enabled Moscow to conclude that at least one or two of Biden’s retinue – or Biden himself – have their heads screwed on right.

Another win for Putin—who insists on acting like a head of state and diplomat, while the Zhou gang run around clucking about the sky being about to fall.

Look, this type of international humiliation was a given, once the decision was made by the Establishment to remove President Trump and to allow Zhou to reside part time in the White House. We need to be demanding accountability.