Vladimir Putin’s desired end state: Opening up a space West is not comfortable with

By: Maj Gen Jagatbir Singh

The question often asked is what Vladimir Putin wants to accomplish in Ukraine by his extreme calculated steps? The answer before the invasion seemed comparatively easy. First, he wanted Ukraine to become a friendly state within Russia’s sphere of influence and not seek membership of NATO. He would have then liked the West, particularly the United States, to acknowledge Russia’s special status and acknowledge the change in Crimea’s status, which would have led to lifting of economic sanctions. While achieving these aims he also wanted to restore Russia’s place amongst the power elite.

However, as this was not possible; he set about recognising the areas of Donetsk and Luhansk and sending in his troops as peacekeepers. This area, known as the Donbas region, has been in control of separatists since 2014 and apart from being Russian speaking, the currency in place was the rouble, the school curriculum was the Russian system, and government salaries were paid by Russia.

One of the causes for the Russian action can be traced back to a decree in February 2021 by President Zelenskyy on the annual day of Resistance to Russia’s Occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol. He had said; “Today I signed a decree on certain measures aimed at de-occupation and reintegration of the Crimean peninsula”.

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy. AP File

An intense strategic narrative claiming that President Zelenskyy was incapable of ruling and had brought Ukraine to ruin by the neo-Nazis; and that the Ukrainian army was incapable of defending the country was then played out by the Russians. Zelenskyy thought he could bank on the West for kinetic assistance which unfortunately has remained restricted to economic sanctions, while simultaneously exposing the hollowness of the UN, as a veto power from any one of the five permanent members of the Council stops action on any measure put before it.

It was hoped that Russian troops breaching Ukrainian defences in multiple locations and reaching Kyiv would have created conditions not only for the end of the Zelenskyy regime but also for the collapse of Ukrainian statehood in its present form. The front lines seemed to be in shambles, the army has not been visible to the extent imagined and there are mainly civil defence personnel taking on the advancing Russians.

However, as the Prussian Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke the Elder said, “No plan survives contact.” Only a layman believes that in the course of a campaign the consistent implementation of an original thought that has been considered in advance in every detail is retained to the end. President Putin thought Russian soldiers would be welcomed as liberators. The Russians hoped that pressure on the centre of gravity, identified as Kyiv, would have forced Ukrainians to demand a change in their regime and call on the government to step down. President Zelensky, along with his pro-Western advisors, would then resign and a pro-Russian government would be installed.

This new regime in Kyiv needed to be pro-Russia; while being acceptable to the residents of western Ukraine and having the support of ethnic minorities. The new government would be required to acknowledge the status of Crimea, sign all proposed accords with Russia, and forsake its desire to join NATO.

In 1939, the Soviet Union invaded Finland, but Finnish fighters stalled the poorly executed Soviet attack for months. Their resistance captured imaginations in the West; British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and other European leaders hailed gallant Finland. But the admiration remained rhetorical: Western powers did not send weapons, let alone intervene militarily. In the end, the Finns kept their honour but lost a grinding war of attrition, ceding more territory than Stalin had initially demanded.

However, today, capitulation has not happened, and resistance is growing and as every Army knows it is easier to fight a conventional force rather than take on a people’s movement. Entering cities has its own set of vulnerabilities and challenges. Urban warfare is not easy. A certain amount of restraint has to be exercised in terms of forces applied. Moreover, the conflict can get prolonged.

However, in spite of the progress of operations, it is unlikely that Russian sovereignty over the Crimean peninsula will remain the prerequisite to ending fighting in Ukraine; this would now be enlarged to include the recognition of Donetsk and Luhansk as independent states. Crimea is crucial as Sevastopol is the home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Russian interests, which lay in securing this crucial port, may now also include denying Ukraine access to the Black Sea which means controlling Odessa as also the Sea of Azov which means Mariupol, which has been the area of intense fighting. He is also looking at redrawing the border along ‘linguist lines’ and making it ‘land locked’.

Incidentally Mariupol is where the Azov Regiment, a far-right all-volunteer infantry military unit whose members are ultra-nationalists and accused of harbouring neo-Nazi and white supremacist ideology has been in focus. The unit has denied it adheres to Nazi ideology as a whole, but Nazi symbols such as the Swastika and SS regalia are present on the uniforms of Azov members such as the neo-Nazi Wolfsangel symbol, which resembles a black swastika on a yellow background.

While it can be assumed that a desired end state for President Putin could be control of the regions up to the Dnieper river, having a pliant government in place in Kyiv which does not profess any ambitions to join NATO, recognition of Crimea as part of Russia and control of Ukraine’s access to the sea.

The US, on the other hand, may feel that Russia has been drawn into a situation similar to the one they faced in Afghanistan wherein in spite of having a government in place the insurgency raged and the casualties mounted. While they were able to subdue the Taliban, they were never able to prevail. Ultimately, domestic public opinion forced them out. However, both the situations while having some commonalities also have wide divergences and the template can never be the same. But a weak bear will have no option other than solidifying its ties with the dragon which is only going to embolden the dragon.

This satellite image provided by Maxar Technologies on 19 March shows the aftermath of the airstrike on the Mariupol Drama theater, Ukraine, and the area around it. AP

Encouraging free citizens from Europe to take up arms to resist the Russians can be counterproductive. A lesson must be taken from the support the CIA gave Osama bin Laden and his ilk of fighters against the Soviets in Afghanistan and the manner in which terrorism raised its head thereafter. Even though there will be arguments to state that they cannot be compared with jihadis as the principal motivator is different. There is also an imbalance between highly trained and well-equipped soldiers against untrained volunteers operating in open terrain. Having similar ‘fighters’ operating freely in Europe will have its own consequences and without doubt the countries that provide them a base to operate will risk being targeted by the Russians.

There is no doubt that the end state can be defined in political objectives and not military objectives in terms of destruction and degradation of their war-waging potential. In fact, as per a recently published analysis the APFSDS ammunition of the Ukrainian tanks lacks the ability to penetrate the Russian armour which in this case is an upgraded version of the T-72. In 1969, the Soviets literally wiped out an island on the Ussuri River with devastating firepower by firing over ten thousand rounds of BM-21 GRAD rocket launcher; this time they have been comparatively restrained in using their firepower be it artillery and air with the aim of minimising the damage to infrastructure and for fear of alienating the local population.

Unfortunately, both leaders are only hardening their stands. President Zelenskyy in a TV address has denounced Russia as a ‘terrorist state’ has also stated, “We did not become slaves, and we never will.” Whereas President Putin has declared: “In the end this will lead to an increase in our independence, self-sufficiency and our sovereignty.” Maybe he was trying to dismiss the sanctions as being counterproductive.

One of the first casualties in war is truth and another given is that both sides feel they are in the right. While the outcome of the kinetic conflict may continue to be blurred with both sides claiming victory, there is no doubt that the economic war and the information war being played out by shaping the perceptions of the world in a vice-like grip is clearly in favour of Zelenskyy. The centre of gravity now needs to shift from Kyviv to targeting the mind of Zelenskyy and the people.

Then US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld while speaking at a US Department of Defence news briefing in February 2002, on the lack of evidence linking the government of Iraq with the supply of weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups, said: “There are known knowns — there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns — that is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

We need to be aware that logic and reason may not stand the test of time and there are likely to be more ‘unknown unknows’ as far as this conflict is concerned. Risks come from situations that are so unexpected that they would not be considered, as most analysts did not expect Russia to move up the escalatory spiral with such speed.

But Putin’s plans could be more focused on rewriting the post-Cold War security order by reinstating Russia’s spheres of influence in Europe, the signs of which were first visible in 2014. There is no doubt that he has opened up a space the West is not comfortable with.

The author is an army veteran. Views expressed are personal.