Risks of Russia Losing: Putin, Ukraine, and Potential for Escalation | Quick Take | GZERO Media

Watching as we near “Victory Day”, May 9th, which is going to be anything but for Putin.

Hi everybody. Happy Monday. Ian Bremmer here and I have your Quick Take going back to Russia and Ukraine. We're almost two months into this war and I continue to be very pessimistic about where we are heading. Over the last few days, the biggest headline, I think, has been the sinking of the Moskva. This is Russia's carrier, its flagship of its Black Sea fleet. It is the worst naval combat loss that Russia has experienced since World War II at the hands of Ukraine, a country that doesn't even have a navy.

Initially, the Russian government said that it was just on fire. It was an explosion, but not that it was attacked. Then they pivoted quickly to saying it's attacked. But if you watch Russian state television focusing more on NATO and not Ukraine, "how could the Ukrainians with the Ukrainian missile take out this extraordinary Russian ship? No, it must be that we're fighting NATO itself. " And this has been a shift that we've seen from the Russians over the course of the last few weeks. The war is taking much longer than they had expected. Their initial efforts to, of course, take Kyiv, to overthrow the Zelensky government have all failed. And what you're seeing is a shift away from, "we're fighting Ukraine and denazifying that regime," and instead towards "the reason it's taking so long is because we're fighting all of NATO, that the West as a whole is fighting against us. And they're sending troops on the ground that they're not really admitting to. They're sending all this military equipment," which, of course, they are trumpeting. And indeed that the attack on this cruiser, which was purely at the hands of the Ukrainian military, nonetheless, the Russians are saying NATO is behind it.

Look, I mean, there is something to this. It is certainly true that NATO is providing a hell of a lot of weaponry now. And the level of weaponry has been increasing every week, both the amount, almost $3 billion in defense support, just from the United States and a lot from almost every corner of NATO. And also increasingly offensive weaponry.

So we're now talking about Switchblade drones, we're talking about helicopters, we're talking about tanks coming from a lot of different NATO countries and that plus intelligence support real-time on the disposition of Russian forces is making it easier for the Ukrainians to beat back the Russian invaders, both outside of Kyiv, but also even in terms of in the Black Sea and in Southeast Ukraine. The Russians are going to adapt their military strategy.

They've fought for 50 days now. But you'll remember, the war against Finland was 100 days before they won it. The Russians have staying power and willing to send more troops into the fight. And I think that the danger here is that the Ukrainians and the West increasingly believe that the Russians can indeed lose, but that only works, and obviously it's the outcome everyone would love to see, leave aside Putin, aside from the fact that he's not prepared to accept it. I mean, if he's not going to capitulate, if he's only going to continue to escalate, then what you really want is to freeze the conflict as opposed to force him into a corner and try to defeat him militarily because full defeat of Russia, militarily vis-a-vis Ukraine is really not doable.

#QuickTake #Ukraine #Putin

[alfaeco]

Hitler was only appeased when he shot himself in his bunker.
He was not appeased when he got Austria, Czechoslovskia, Rehnania, Poland even France.

[Kharmazov]

Russia needs to loose this and must do so badly. Nothing short of total liberation of Ukraine can be accepted.

[MichaelBrown-yjkj]

I think that you missing the point. Russia already was given parts of Ukraine and he came back for more. If he believes that NATO will back down every time he threatens the use of WMD then he will use that tactic when he gets to Poland, Romania and the Baltic States. What will these countries have to give to him to appease him? "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ... Winston Churchill.

[rogerdines]

I fully take the points you make about the dangers of defeating Russia, but, if she is not utterly defeated, we will make the same mistake as we did after WW1, and, in 20 years' time Russia will again start to advance into what was the Soviet Union.

[floydnotpink]

There is a scenario missing from this excellent analysis. The morale of Russian troops will be the deciding factor in this next part of the war. I can foresee many Russian soldiers surrendering or deserting or just 'disappearing' because they now know what they will face. It may take some time for the reality to sink in but sink in it will. Before, in the north many of them went in to fight without knowing the strength of the enemy. The phone calls back to girlfriends and mothers demonstrated just how pissed off they had become. Putin may try to refresh his front line with new recruits but most of them will be from Russia's ethnic minorities and not from Moscow's own human resources. Consequently they will not be as self motivated to fight for a leader that many of them secretly loath. They can't express their loathing for fear of a jail sentence so Russia boasts that Putin has 80% support form his own people. Like heck he does. These new ethnic recruits will now be aware that they have a determined foe in front of them prepared to die for their land and with modern weapons to use against them. What are Russians dying for? It's a question many of them will ask themselves. I expect mutinies and even more deaths of commanders, not from Ukrainians but from their own troops. I think the Russians will turn on their commanders and just turn around and go home. Putin can't execute thousands of them. He's already treading water with his own people. His own army will revolt and that will be the end of him.

[locopoco]

I don't agree with your takes. It's ultimately Ukraine's decision on how they want the war to end, not our fear of what Russia can do. Bullies don't get to choose the world order because they don't get to have it their way.

[karmadave]

Ian. In general, I agree that we want to see the Ukrainian's suffering end. However...given that Putin will not back down, and keep upping the ante, the only just outcome I see is a complete Russian defeat. This means retreating from all Ukrainian territories (including Crimea), paying massive reparations and eliminating Russia's ability to wage offensive war. That's my take. Respectfully 😐

[oxpahnakompromatkohtpol]

We need to do whatever it takes so that Putin is comfortable and happy. Okay, not really - damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead for NATO and Ukraine!

[tedsmusic]

“What can we do to keep a psychopathic leader from scorching the earth?” is the wrong question. “Do we want to live in a world where psychopathic leaders are allowed to rape and kill?” might be a better question, especially in Putin’s case. “What if he loses too badly?” “What if the war takes too long?” These, again, are not the right questions. “What if he understands that most of us would rather die or live in a scorched earth than to allow Syria, North Korea, the Taliban, ISIS, or Shanghai?” is the better question. We don’t allow heartless murderers to run free in our streets—we shouldn’t allow them free reign at scale. The destruction is more devastating when nukes are involved, but the moral calculation of when to go to war is the same. Don’t be a willing hostage.

[bryntnjal]

I'd like to know under what scenario Russia will pay war reparations to completely rebuild all that they have destroyed in Ukraine.

[douglassmith]

Zelenskyy is now such a powerful worldwide leader, particularly morally, it seems to me impossible that Europe and the US would "keep Ukraine from winning", as Ian seems to be suggesting. The trajectory of NATO arms supplies is clearly upward, while hardware reserves on the Russian side already show signs of being depleted (and with sanctions, these will be difficult to replenish). If Zelenskyy wants an extended conflict -- let's say 12 months -- they could very well beat the Russians back to the Feb 23 borders. This would be a clear Russian defeat, which Putin would not accept; but by that stage, I suspect Putin would have been deposed. The losses by then would be so undeniably devastating militarily and politically, I don't think Putin could survive. The Russian (state-run!) media response from the Moskva sinking already shows considerable anger directed at the Russian leaders and doubt about their competency. A clear Russian defeat in the Donbas, with the loss of another 10 Battalion Tactical Groups (5-10k more casualties) would increase the level of doubt and anger considerably. At some point, Russian domestic politics needs to be considered -- it is not entirely monolithic.

[richardkut]

What about letting the Ukraine people decide what they want?

[billb]

It's not just an ethical responsibility, it's a literal one.
We told Ukraine that we would defend them from Russia when they gave up their nukes.
The message to the world is: "You'd better get some nukes, because you cannot count on the US to defend you."

On one hand, it is good that we have done as much as we have.

On the other hand, it is not nearly enough. Get out of the way, Washington, and let Poland donate their fighters.

Send 3, 000 drones instead of 300.

No-fly zone. Ships. Troops.

Get serious. This is a serious war, and WE promised to defend Ukraine years ago.

Saying that up front would have been a far better deterrent than mumbling about vague "costs".

^-- That means that it is partially _our fault_ that Putin thought he was free to invade.

EDIT: Regarding my troll, it isn't that I don't have counter-arguments; I have already made them. It's just that he has not said anything intelligent that would be worthwhile responding to. It's not "critical discourse" to troll someone else's thread; it's trolling. They are two very different things.

[Inmyforces]

A couple of thoughts: The Moskva was a guided missile cruiser, not a carrier. Second, India is buying up as much of the slack as they can (they can get oil and coal at essentially the same price as they bought it before the crisis), and they will look to continue to do so. They are even talking about forming a direct payment system for the resources that India is currently buying from Russia, so they won't need to SWIFT system to complete these transactions. It remains to be seen if the sanctions will work to squeeze Russia's currency reserves long term. NATO/ the West may be able to hurt them in the short-term in some areas, but Putin looks to be in this for the long haul at this point, and the two most populous nations in the world look to want Russia's natural resources. This will keep them in the game way longer than the West would like.

[truth]

What is the redline for the US when it comes to tactical nukes and chemical munitions?

[Coginy]

Ian was saying Kyiv would be taken within a week and here we are at months 2 and Kyiv is completely retaken back! Ukraine can win as long as the West doesn't chicken out, they need to give them all the weapons they need as soon as possible to cut the civilian losses and finish this war

[davex]

We have the Monroe doctrine. This means countries in the western hemisphere are not allowed to to make independent decisions regarding who they allie themselves with militarily. Russia says the same about Ukraine.

[voto]

This guy doesn't get it. If you give Russia anything at all. They will just come back and take more later. The only thing Russia understands is strength.

[JohnSmith-wsfq]

Seems like we're between Scylla and Charybdis. Neither appeasing nor opposing Russia have particularly welcome outcomes.

[peterdollins]

Drive Russia out of Ukraine & if he stays out let Putin be but too weakened to invade anyone else, ever again.