Vladimir putin

When it is 1938 in Washington, it is already past midnight in Moscow. The clock is ticking and the map of Europe is being redrawn, but this is not a Munich moment. We are now past that, and past the time when the leader of a Western democracy might have the honesty to admit to his public, as Neville Chamberlain did in 1938, that he doesn’t want to fight a war over “a quarrel in a faraway country between people of which we know little.” The shadow of Munich shames and intimidates the leaders of the Western democracies, and not without reason. But if there is a Munich moment in the latest Ukraine crisis, then it happened nearly seven years ago — in 2015, when the Obama administration backed the Minsk II accords and the dismemberment of Ukraine.

In the coming days, if intelligence assessments are accurate, the world will watch the unfolding of a bloody war between Russia and Ukraine. It will make history for all the wrong reasons, as the largest armed conflict since World War Two. And while Moscow would almost certainly defeat Kyiv on the battlefield, the real story will be the horror unleashed by the first modern war fought between nations of real consequence in decades. Such a war would showcase military modernizations that, while well-known, will still shock most Americans and change our perception that war in the twenty-first century is anything but cost-free. Worst of all, there's chance that a Russia-Ukraine war might not be contained to just those two countries, sucking in America in the process.

As the Ukraine crisis continues to develop, it has become impossible to avoid mentioning Georgia and its relations with the West. This is not only due to the similarities in the two countries' geopolitical circumstances, but also because Georgia is explicitly mentioned with Ukraine in President Putin's demands to the West to forego any future NATO expansion. Like Ukraine, for years, Georgia has sat in the uncomfortable position of being pro-Western without enjoying the protections afforded by membership in both NATO and the European Union. Yet a country that was once a staunch Western ally has become mired in accusations of authoritarianism, behind-the-scenes governance, and covert pro-Russian sentiment. Georgia and Ukraine have occupied a unique position in the post-Soviet space.

The United States is doing what it can to deter Russian President Vladimir Putin from ordering another invasion of Ukraine. Despite the cool and collected persona that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is trying to present to his people, the White House still believes Russian military action is "imminent.” The Biden administration recently put 8,500 American troops on alert for deployment to Eastern Europe. Washington has spent the last several weeks trying to convince the Kremlin that any incursion into its neighbor would be costly. On Tuesday, the US sent a third shipment of lethal equipment to the Ukrainian military, including 300 additional Javelin anti-tank missiles. This comes on top of the 200,000 pounds of lethal aid that had already been provided by Washington.

Lost in the endless debate about whether Russia will invade Ukraine is the real reason that Moscow — armed with nuclear weapons and one of the most advanced militaries on the planet — feels so threatened by its neighbors, the NATO alliance, and ultimately the United States. While the expansion of NATO in the 1990s plays a big role, it is Russia’s everlasting internal debate about its place in the world that is the real source of tension. It's a historical black hole no one wants to get sucked into, but unless resolved it has the potential to be a source of armed conflict the likes of which Europe has not witnessed since World War II. Geography and history are both a blessing and a curse for Russia.

President Biden said this week that a “minor incursion” of Russian troops into Ukrainian territory would not bring about the severe economic sanctions the White House threatened in response to a “significant invasion.” His counterpart in the Kremlin can probably hardly believe his luck. Effectively, Vladimir Putin has been given carte blanche by the West to launch military operations against Ukraine. Of course, the fact that there is no definition of what constitutes a “minor incursion” gifts the White House a preemptive get-out clause from having to truly confront Moscow.

President Joe Biden spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin today via video conference for just over two hours, the second time in six months that the two leaders have engaged in a face-to-face conversation. For Biden, the message he sought to deliver was strict and to the point: if you, Mr. Putin, go ahead and order a second invasion of Ukraine in nearly eight years, you can expect a raft of economic penalties that will negatively effect everything from Russia’s access to the SWIFT payment system to the ability of Russian banks to convert rubles into dollars. For the security-minded Putin, the meeting was an opportunity to press Biden on his principal demand: a written legal guarantee from Washington and the rest of NATO that Ukraine will not be invited into the alliance.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is once again making the West nervous. And unlike his previous display of military might near the border with Ukraine last spring, Washington is concerned enough that it's sent CIA director (and former US ambassador to Russia) William Burns to Moscow for talks earlier this month. If Burns’s trip was meant to scare the Kremlin into halting additional military formations near the Russia-Ukraine border, then the confab didn’t work as planned. The Ukrainian government estimates that up to 100,000 Russian forces are now camped out in the area. American and European officials are sharing information with one another about various scenarios the Russians could be contemplating, the most dramatic being a second invasion of Ukraine in seven years.