The Economist (2022-01-08)

18 Briefing Putin talks to NATO TheEconomistJanuary8th 2022

sense of urgency, but it hardly suggests an

appetite for patient diplomacy. “If there is

no constructive response within a reason­

able  time,”  warned  Sergei  Lavrov,  Russia’s

foreign  minister,  on  December  31st,  “then

Russia  will  be  forced  to  take  all  necessary

measures  to...eliminate  unacceptable

threats to our security.” 

One  interpretation  is  that  Mr  Putin  is

counting on the West to dismiss his maxi­

malist  demands,  furnishing  him  with  a

pretext to invade Ukraine. In recent weeks

Mr Putin and his ministers have made lu­

rid  and  ridiculous  allegations,  ranging

from the suggestion that Ukraine is perpe­

trating genocide on ethnic Russians to the

idea  that  American  mercenaries  are  pre­

paring  a  chemical­weapons  attack  in  the

Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, which is

controlled by Russian proxies.

Use before thaw

Though  European  and  American  officials

say  Russia  has  not  yet  made  a  final  deci­

sion  to  invade  Ukraine,  it  will  probably

have to decide whether to launch an opera­

tion by the end of winter, says Michael Kof­

man  of  cna,  a  think­tank.  Troops  cannot

be kept on an invasion footing indefinitely,

some  of  them  thousands  of  kilometres

from their normal bases, without their mo­

rale plummeting and their vehicles requir­

ing maintenance. Ukraine’s frozen ground

will  begin  to  thaw  in  March,  making  it

harder  for  tanks  to  advance.  In  April  Rus­

sia’s conscripts will also be replaced with a

new, inexperienced cohort.

Nonetheless,  perhaps  to  avoid  giving

Mr Putin the opportunity to claim that he

has  run  out  of  diplomatic  road,  America

has agreed to talk. A phone call between Joe

Biden,  America’s  president,  and  Mr  Putin

on December 30th was “frank, meaningful

and...quite constructive”, noted Yury Usha­

kov,  an  aide  to  Mr  Putin.  “It  is  important

that  the  American  side  has  demonstrated

its willingness to understand the logic and

essence  of  Russian  concerns,”  he  added.

Diplomats  from  both  countries  are  due  to

meet in Geneva on January 10th. Two days

later the nato­Russia Council will meet in

Brussels for the first time in years, and on

January  13th  the  Organisation  for  Security

and Co­operation in Europe (osce), a group

that  includes  Russia  and  all  natocoun­

tries, is to gather in Vienna.

The flurry of diplomacy satisfies Mr Pu­

tin’s desire for a seat at the top table and for

a  chance  to  air  his  grievances.  Yet  talking

alone may not quench Mr Putin’s thirst for

vindication.  On  December  27th  Mr  Lavrov

warned  against  “endless  discussions,

which is something the West knows how to

do and is notorious for”. Mr Putin will want

something he can present as a diplomatic

victory. What that might be is less clear, but

Mr  Putin  and  Mr  Biden  “are  signalling  a

readiness  to  go  around  the  conventional

roadblockstodiplomacyonEuropeanse­

curity”,suggestsMatthewRojanskyofthe

KennanInstituteinWashington.Hesees

twoareasofpotentialco­operation:mis­

silesandconventionalarmscontrol.

Missiles may not seem a propitious

placetostart. In 2019 Americaabandoned

the Intermediate­range Nuclear Forces

(inf) treaty,whichbarredland­basedmis­

siles with ranges between 500km and

5,500km,arguingthata newRussianmis­

sileviolatedit.Americaandnatohavere­

peatedlydismissedRussia’sofferofa mo­

ratoriumonsuchweapons,arguingthat

Russiahasalreadydeployedthem.Forits

part, Russia claims thatAmerican anti­

missileinterceptorsunderconstructionin

RomaniaandPolandcanberepurposedas

offensivemissilelaunchers.

Even so, both America and Russia

mightfind groundsforcompromise.Mr

PutinroutinelyfretsthatifAmericawere

toplacehypotheticalmedium­rangemis­

silesineasternEurope,includinginUk­

raine,theycouldreachMoscowinmin­

utes. Meanwhile, MrPutin’s owncruise

missilesinKaliningradcouldreachBerlin

justasquickly.Adealwhichbarredthose

missilesfromEuropebutleftAmericafree

todeploythemagainstChinainAsia—es­

sentially a resurrected andregionalised

inftreaty—mightappealtobothsides.

Ifmissiles proveintractable, another

subjectofdiscussioncouldbeconvention­

alarmscontrol.Here,too,bothsideshavea

long,andlong­standing,listofgripes.A

pactsignedin1999,theAdaptedConven­

tionalForcesinEurope(acfe) treaty,with­

eredawayafterWesterncountriesaccused

Russiaoffailingtowithdrawina timely

fashionfromMoldovaandGeorgia,both

formerSovietrepublics.Russiasuspended

its participation in 2007 and withdrew

fromthetreatyaltogetherin2015,angry

thatothershadnotratifiedit.

WesternalliescomplainthatRussiahas

bentotherrulesrequiringcountriestogive

advancenoticeoflargeexercises—likelast

year’sZapadexercise—bypretendingthat

bigdrillsareinfactaseriesofseparate

smallerones.Russia,inturn,saysthatthe

Westhasfailedtoconsideritssuggestions,

madeoverrecentyears, for confidence­

buildingmeasures,suchasproposalsfor

warplanestousetransponders,greaterno­

ticeoflong­rangebomberflightsandthe

movementofexercisesawayfromborders.

A new, full­blown treaty governing

suchthingsisunlikely.Fornatotoforgo

drillsnearRussiawouldbetantamountto

cutting off theBaltic states, no part of

whichisfarfromRussia.NorwouldRussia

considera reciprocalbanonexercisesin

Kaliningrad, an exclave between Poland

andLithuania,orMurmansk,nearNorway,

orBelarus,whichabutsPoland,saysDmi­

try Stefanovich of imemo, an institute

linkedtotheRussianAcademyofSciences.

Butgreatertransparencyandlimitsonthe

sizeofexercisesarepossible,hesays,and

wouldbuildtrust.OlgaOlikeroftheInter­

nationalCrisisGroup,yetanotherthink­

tank,suggeststhattheBlackSeawouldbea

promisingcandidateformutualrestraint

with, for instance, nato countries con­

ductingfewerpatrolsnearCrimeainex­

changeforRussiaacceptingconstraintson

itsBlackSeaFleet.“Allofthiscouldbesort­

edout,”shesays.“Buteverybodyhastobe

willingtositdownandcompromise.”

Measureslikethesewouldbewelcome,

whateverhappensinUkraine.Itisunlike­

BRITAIN

NETH.

NORWAY

ICELAND

HUNGARY

CZECHREP.

ROMANIA GEORGIA

BULGARIA

N.MAC.

BELARUS

KAZAKH-

STAN

MOLDOVA

BOS.

KOS.

SERB.

Crimea

BlackSea

Baltic

Sea

BELG.

GERMANY

POLAND

UKRAINE

FINLAND

SWEDEN

ESTONIA

TURKEY

FRANCE

GREECE

RUSSIA

LATVIA

LITH.

SPAIN

PORT.

ITALY

MONT.

Controlledby

Russian-backed

D separatists

on

ba

s

Sevastopol

Murmansk

StPetersburg

Kyiv

Bucharest

Moscow

Berlin

Vienna

Formerborder

betweenEast&

WestGermany

500 km

1990s

2000s

2010s

1949-

NATO members

January 2022

By joining date

Kaliningrad