Crisis in Ukraine
Angela Stent (top left), Charles Kupchan (top right), Rose Gottemoeller (bottom left), and Richard Haass (bottom right)
Key Points
Russia’s recent mobilization of troops to the Ukrainian border has serious implications for NATO
The conflict is evolving quickly but there are still windows for diplomatic measures to be discussed
There are certain internal complications in Russia and Ukraine that are obstacles to the invasion agenda of the Putin administration
Summary
On Wednesday, Feb. 23, 2022, the Council on Foreign Relations hosted a virtual presentation and conversation with Angela Stent, Charles Kupchan, and Rose Gottemoeller. The event, entitled “Crisis in Ukraine,” discussed the major events that have occurred leading up to the week of Feb. 22, the implications of an invasion, and how the US and Europe should respond. The event was moderated by Richard Haass, President of the Council of Foreign Relations.
Haass kicked off the event by introducing the speakers and their merits as scholar-practitioners. He noted that it is important to have a familiar perspective from both inside the function of government as well as outside in the world of political academia. Given how quickly the conflict in Ukraine is evolving, Haass also contextualized the event by discussing a few key developments, like the report from the Pentagon on Russian troop deployment released a few days prior to the event, as well as Vladimir Putin’s recognition of independence for separatist-controlled regions less than 24 hours before the event.
Charles Kupchan, a former Special Assistant for the National Security Council and now a Senior Fellow for the Council on Foreign Relations, noted that the reports of military engagement might have been premature for these regions. Rose Gottemoeller, former NATO Deputy Secretary General and now a Stanford professor, pointed out that Feb. 23, Armed Forces Day, is a holiday for the Russian military. She projected that the Russian military was not going to immediately push into the Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, even from the separatist perspective.
Angela Stent, former National Intelligence Officer for Russia on the National Intelligence Council and now a non-resident Senior Fellow for the Brookings Institute, followed in agreement with the reality that diplomatic measures are still being taken, highlighting for example the US-Russian cooperation on the Iran Nuclear Deal - one of many areas in which conversation is taking precedence over conflict.
Satellite imagery depicting additional equipment and troop deployment heading towards Ukraine, captured on Feb. 23 near Kupino, Russia / Photo: Maxar Technologies
This conversation and the presiding questions from Haass set the stage for the rest of the event, as the speakers fielded questions from Haass and qualified the points of agreement while discussing further on their points of disagreement by posing questions to each other.
To begin, Haass was interested in evaluating the inevitability of this conflict, to which Stent mentioned the post-Cold War engagement with Central and Eastern Europe during the Clinton Administration, specifically the implementation of NATO to address the security concerns of many countries that had not been fully autonomous since the start of World War II. Stent and Kupchan agreed that Russia’s lack of involvement in this security process is a contributor to the state of the present situation. Stent discussed how the lack of inclusion in diplomatic talks and the decline of NATO relations under the Trump administration impacted the Russian perspective on the true solidarity between the US and Europe, causing Russia to underestimate the response against invasion.
Kupchan questioned the true magnitude of importance Ukrainian-NATO relations hold for Russia’s security considerations, pointing to another openly debated school of thought regarding Russia’s domestic blowback. Haass and Kupchan went back and forth on Ukraine’s political and economic openness and the concern from the Putin administration that liberalism crossing into the Russian border is perhaps a bigger threat than NATO troops.
Gottemoeller, drawing on her experience working under the Clinton Administration, discussed the importance of the NATO programs despite how Putin may feel about them, how Russia was frequently drawn into NATO discussions, and the many different ways in which Putin and the US have shared interests over the past two decades, most notably around anti-terrorism.
Discourse on the historical build-up of the conflict continued until Haass transitioned to the next topic: the stakes of the conflict as they relate to US foreign policy. Gottemoeller brought up China’s statements regarding territorial integrity and sovereignty this week, demonstrating that the US should continue to address this issue not only as it pertains to Russia but as it applies globally. Kupchan concurred, noting that the US and Europe should be evaluating Russia’s long-term strategy in regard to Eastern Europe and territorial expansion into countries like Estonia. Stent then emphasized some of the impacts that the average American citizen would face, most notably higher gas prices and general economic market instability.
Haass did not want to make predictive comments but he stated that moving forward, the conflict would likely be decided by the actions of Putin in the days following the conversation. He proposed two scenarios, the first being a prolonged pause and the second a confrontation that would lead to further sanctions and increased military support from NATO to Ukraine. Haass described these responses as already being in “the cupboard” of the conflict, and Kupchan discussed how “the cupboard” also contains diplomatic measures that NATO should attempt to negotiate during the current pause. Kupchan also noted that Putin has historically taken small bites, using Abkhazia, Crimea, and Nagorno-Karabakh as evidence that the Russian strategy is often low-risk and low-cost. Gottemoeller agreed with his assessment that even if the military asymmetry between Ukraine and Russia resulted in a swift invasion, Putin would then be tasked with leading an unwilling population. She added how often Putin’s European strategy has been a distraction from the Indo-Pacific strategy, to which Stent followed by distinguishing between China’s support of Russia in 2014 during the invasion of Crimea and China’s current support of a war in Ukraine, or lack thereof as Ukraine is a valuable partner in the Belt and Road initiative. Stent concluded by discussing the recent deployment of Russian troops on three fronts in Ukraine and pointed to the possible ramifications to come in the following days.
Finally, the event hosted a Q&A session which fielded many great questions from journalists, experts, and enthusiastic attendees. In particular, Lawrence Wright from the New Yorker asked, “Is there enough of a civic life in Russia to restrain him in any sense?” After a brief comment, Haass directed the question about Russia’s domestic consequences, another item in “the cupboard,” to the panel. Gottemoeller firstly introduced the concerns on social media in Russia and mentioned how the so-called “mothers movements” have always had an impact in withdrawing Russian troops and ending conflicts. Stent agreed conceptually but highlighted how difficult the Putin administration has made it for NGOs, opposition leaders, and the banned Union of the Committees of Soldiers' Mothers of Russia regarding advocacy and demonstrations. Kupchan emphasized Putin’s impressive ability to effectively direct the domestic narrative, such as in Ukraine in 2014, in Syria in 2015, and now again in Ukraine in 2022; however, Kupchan stated that the public perception of burning buildings in Kyiv and Russian soldiers returning in body bags and coffins makes Putin’s long-term occupation venture riskier. Haass offered the last response, asserting that NATO would soon know whether the paused phase of the conflict would transition into a full-on invasion and if support to Ukraine’s resistance would be the next move.
This report was compiled by Seamas Porter on February 28, 2022, and edited by Sophie Slade.