Print Magazine
Brussels Morning Newspaper
Friday, March 24, 2023
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
    • About Us
  • EU institutions
    • Commission
    • Parliament
    • Council
  • Europe
  • World
  • Economy
  • Culture and Society
  • In Depth
    • Ambassador’s Corner
    • The American Angle
    • Sustainable Perspective
    • Europe With Transparency
    • Place de la Bourse
    • The Macro-Economist
    • Southeast Europe
Brussels Morning Newspaper
  • Home
    • About Us
  • EU institutions
    • Commission
    • Parliament
    • Council
  • Europe
  • World
  • Economy
  • Culture and Society
  • In Depth
    • Ambassador’s Corner
    • The American Angle
    • Sustainable Perspective
    • Europe With Transparency
    • Place de la Bourse
    • The Macro-Economist
    • Southeast Europe
Brussels Morning Newspaper
No Result
View All Result
Home Europe

A second Russian invasion of Ukraine: unlikely but possible

Martin Sokolov by Martin Sokolov
23 April 2021
in Europe
A second Russian invasion of Ukraine: unlikely but possible
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Sofia (Brussels Morning) On 22 April, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu announced that Russia was withdrawing the troops and equipment it had recently stationed near Ukraine and the illegally annexed Crimean Peninsula. According to the official press release, Russia’s forces have completed their exercise and, therefore, there is no need for them to remain in the area. However, Shoigu’s statement does not clarify how many additional troops were relocated to Crimea in the first place, nor whether all would be pulled back to their permanent bases. 

Still, the announced withdrawal considerably deescalates tensions and opens some much-needed room for analysis and reflection. Cautious forms of optimism are nonetheless essential, as the situation is still a powder keg, as it has been since 2014 and will almost certainly remain so.

Build-up

On 20 April, following a briefing by the Ukrainian foreign minister Kuleba Dmytro, the office of the EU’s top diplomat Josep Borrell said that over 100,000 Russian troops had already been relocated to the Russian-Ukrainian border. Both Washington and NATO cited similar numbers, highlighting that the build-up of Russian forces was greater than prior to the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. 

Satellite images published by the Wall Street Journal on 20 April showed the extensive presence of Russian military aircraft and other equipment, while on 13 April, Shoigu announced that Moscow was sending 15 naval vessels from its Caspian Flotilla and at least five from its’ Baltic Flotilla. 

According to retired USAF General Philip Breedlove, who was Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO Allied Command Operations when Russian forces invaded Ukraine in 2014, the satellite images showed that while the Russian units were not poised to strike immediately, Moscow still had multiple military options. 

The CIA’s director, William Burns, offered a similar assessment that Moscow was more likely seeking to intimidate as oppose to invade. 

Regarding the Russian warships, it was also possible to conclude that as long as they remained in the Sea of Azov, an invasion was unlikely. However, as Paul Goble suggested in an article for the Jamestown Foundation, if the vessels were to be relocated westwards, an imminent large-scale invasion of Ukraine was a plausible scenario.

Irreconcilable differences

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kiev and Moscow began drifting more and more apart. The Kremlin almost certainly sincerely believes that this is the West’s fault. This rift culminated in 2014 with Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and military support for the break-away regions in Eastern Ukraine. 

Since then, there has been much talk regarding the need to end the conflict, which objectively benefits neither Kiev nor Moscow in the long term. However, there are several irreconcilable differences between the two parties.

Russia wants, or rather, needs to counter the further enlargement of NATO eastwards, dissuade Ukraine from aligning itself with the West, and have a Russia-friendly government in Kiev, which can ensure the long-term pro-Russian orientation of the country. 

Ukraine, per contra, considers NATO enlargement and possible membership as deterrence for further Russian aggression, alignment with the West as a prospect for economic growth, and domestic pro-Russian policies as a threat to national security and sovereignty.   

Nevertheless, a large-scale military operation in Ukraine will resolve none of these issues. What is more, it would almost certainly drive Moscow into further international isolation and also terminate projects that Russia deems of strategic importance, such as Nord Stream 2. 

That is why it is more likely that the Kremlin is seeking to accomplish two objectives: intimidate and stress-test the new administration of US President Joe Biden; and to distract from the considerable internal challenges, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, low living standard, corruption, President Putin’s approval ratings and domestic support for opposition leader Alexei Navalny. 

Unlikely but possible

From any remotely rational standpoint, a Russian large-scale military operation in Ukraine is highly unlikely; however, not all international developments are rational. Additionally, Russia annexed Crimea in an attempt to reassert itself as a regional and global power, protect strategic assets, counter NATO and EU enlargement, and discourage further alignments of post-Soviet states with the West. Not only have almost none of these been achieved but the country has become increasingly isolated and under growing economic sanctions. 

To compensate for this failure, the Kremlin has engaged in acts driven by weakness and desperation. These include the attempted murder of Sergey Skripal in 2018, interference in the 2016 US presidential election, the coup plot in Montenegro in 2016, the poisoning of Bulgarian arms dealer Emilian Gebrev in 2015 and involvement in an explosion of the Czech ammunition depot in Vrbětice in 2014, to name a few. 

While these events may be regarded by some as elements of a complex hybrid warfare-based engagement by Russia, they are increasingly reminiscent of a much more ad hoc based approach of a country acting out of desperation to be recognised as an important global player. Furthermore, one should not overlook the role of the intelligence services in such a heavily centralised form of governance, in which President Vladimir Putin has a decisive say on all key issues. Authoritarian-leaning administrations tend to promote obedience and loyalty over professionalism and innovation, which inevitably has a trickle-down effect along the chain of command. 

Nobody wants to bring bad news to the man in charge, which inadvertently may delude essential information and assessments.  

Therefore, it is possible that a contradictory to the rational reading of the situation may end up on President Putin’s desk. This assessment, together with the increasingly risk-prone actions of the Kremlin, illustrate why even the unlikeliest scenario is still a possible aspect of Russia’s approach to the world.

Tags: Europe-FeatureMain-Slider
Facebook Twitter Youtube LinkedIn

About Us

Brussels Morning is a daily online newspaper based in Belgium. BM publishes unique and independent coverage on international and European affairs. With a Europe-wide perspective, BM covers policies and politics of the EU, significant Member State developments, and looks at the international agenda with a European perspective.

Category

  • Ambassador’s Corner
  • Belgium News
  • Brussels
  • Commission
  • Council
  • Culture and Society
  • Diplomacy
  • Economy
  • EU Institutions
  • Europe
  • Europe With Transparency
  • Features
  • Health & Fitness
  • In Depth
  • Member States
  • Middle East Eye
  • Opinion
  • Our pick
  • Parliament
  • Place de la Bourse
  • Southeast Europe
  • Sustainable Perspective
  • The American Angle
  • The Macro-Economist
  • Uncategorised
  • US Elections
  • World

More info

  • About Us
  • Advertising
  • Cookies Policy
  • Contact Us
  • FAQ
  • Jobs

Brussels Morning Newspaper - All Rights Reserved © 2020

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Brussels Bubble
    • Parliament
    • Commission
    • Council
  • Wider Europe
    • Member States
  • World
  • Business & Society
  • Europe With Transparency
  • Culture & Society
  • Policy Talks
    • Place de la Bourse
    • The Macro-Economist
    • Sustainable Perspective
    • Ambassador’s Corner
    • The American Angle
    • Southeast Europe
  • Print Magazine

Brussels Morning Newspaper - All Rights Reserved © 2020

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT