LONDON (Reuters) – Russian President Vladimir Putin has not yet publicly commented on the rapid withdrawal of Russian forces in northeastern Ukraine. However, national nationalist forces are pushing to regain control of the war.
If what Western intelligence officials and public intelligence analysis are saying is correct, Putin has little way of getting things under control quickly. Most of the available tools carry risks, both nationally and geopolitically.
The most formidable opponents Putin has faced so far since coming to power in 1999 have been against Islamist forces in Chechnya and the North Caucasus, but in those campaigns he chose to strengthen his forces.
Here are his main options in the war in Ukraine:
◎ Stabilize the front line and counterattack after unit reorganization
Russian and Western military experts agree that, from the Russian point of view, the Russian military must quickly stabilize the front line to stop the Ukrainian advance, reorganize its forces and, if possible, counterattack. need to develop a strategy.
However, among Western countries, since Russia has lost a large number of troops in battles with the Ukrainian army and abandoned or destroyed a large amount of equipment, does it really have enough ground forces and weapons to deploy?
Konrad Musica, head of Lochan Consulting in Poland, said that following the withdrawal of Russian troops from northeastern Ukraine, “the force is exhausted.” It was not delivered. I think the situation will only get worse because there are fewer people who want to join the military. If Russia wants to increase its military strength, it must mobilize. “
◎ National mobilization
Russia can mobilize some 2 million reservists with military experience over the past five years, but training and deploying them will take time.
Cheong Wa Dae said on the 13th that national mobilization has not been discussed “at this point”.
Even if the general mobilization gets the support of nationalists, it will not be welcomed by ordinary adult men living in urban areas. They are reportedly reluctant to join the war.
A large-scale mobilization would force the government to revise its official message on the Ukrainian question, calling it an all-out war rather than a limited-purpose “special military operation”. The government’s policy of ensuring the daily lives of most Russians before the invasion of Ukraine should therefore be overturned.
A move to all-out war would also represent an internal political risk of public opposition to conscription. Furthermore, launching an all-out war against the Slavic people themselves would also make the Putin administration look bad.
Andrei Kruchunov, the head of RIAC, a think tank close to the Russian foreign ministry, has long said that the Russian government is reluctant to mobilize.
“Many people in big cities don’t want to go to war, so general mobilization is unlikely to be popular,” he said. I think it’s clear it’s going to be profitable, “he said.
Former British Ambassador to Russia Tony Brenton said a full mobilization would take months to lead to a strengthening of the Russian army.
◎ Expectations that Europe will be shaken by Russia’s energy strategy
Two Russian officials familiar with the Kremlin office’s thinking told Reuters last month what they expected Putin to do. He said he hopes the high energy prices and supply shortages this winter will spur European powers to pressure Ukraine for a truce on favorable terms for Russia.
Some European diplomats, however, have said that Ukraine’s recent military successes have made efforts by some European nations to persuade Ukraine to make less significant concessions.
And in recent weeks, Germany and other countries have become more committed to their stance on Russia, appearing more determined to overcome the winter energy crisis.
◎ Expansion of missile targets
Russian forces retreating in northeastern Ukraine have turned to missile attacks on Ukrainian electrical installations. As a result, temporary power outages have occurred in major cities such as Kharkiv and surrounding areas such as Poltava and Sumy. Water supplies and mobile communications networks were also affected.
Such an operation would be applauded by some of the Russian nationalist forces, who would like the Russian army to destroy Ukrainian infrastructure more permanently with cruise missiles. However, it could be subject to international criticism.
Russian nationalist forces have also long argued to attack the Ukrainian capital Kyiv (Kiev) and other “decision-making centers” elsewhere. If done, it will inevitably lead to serious collateral damage.
◎ Abolition or reduction of the wheat export resumption agreement
Putin continued to complain that the UN and Turkey brokered deal to resume Ukrainian grain exports is unfair to Russia and the poorest countries.
Putin will meet with Turkish President Erdogan this week to discuss amendments to the agreement. If Putin wants to strike Ukraine immediately, he has the option to suspend or cancel the agreement, or not to renew it when it expires in November.
While the West and poorer countries in the Middle East and Africa will blame Putin for exacerbating the global food shortage, Putin is expected to shift the blame to Ukraine.
◎ Peace agreement
The office of the Russian president intends to inform Ukraine of the terms for some sort of peace agreement when the time is right. Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has promised to use military force to liberate the territories occupied by Russia.
The targets Zelensky must liberate include Crimea, which Russia forcibly annexed in 2014. Russia has repeatedly stated that the Crimea issue is finally settled.
Russia officially recognizes the pro-Russian powers of eastern Ukraine, the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Lugansk People’s Republic, as states, and ceding these territories to Ukraine seems politically impossible.
Russia’s first “just cause” for its invasion of Ukraine was the “liberation” of the pro-Russian population persecuted in these two regions.
Of course, Russia will have a hard time convincing the national public to return the partially controlled southern part of Ukraine. Southern Kherson Oblast is directly connected to the northern part of Crimea and is a strategic point that supplies most of the water needed for the Crimean peninsula.
Kherson Oblast, along with neighboring Zaporozhye Oblast, also serves as a land corridor through which Russia can supply goods to the Crimean Peninsula.
◎ Use of nuclear weapons
Several senior Russian officials have rejected Western views that Russia could use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine. However, the fear remains in the West.
The introduction of tactical nuclear weapons would not only cause massive damage, but could also escalate the situation into a direct war between the West and Russia.
The Russian nuclear doctrine allows the use of nuclear weapons in the event of a preemptive attack by nuclear weapons or other types of weapons of mass destruction, or in the event that conventional weapons pose an existential threat to the state.
Mr Brenton, the former British ambassador to Russia, warned that Putin could use nuclear weapons if cornered and faced a humiliating defeat.
According to Brenton, given the choice between losing Russia and losing badly, putting Putin out of power or avoiding such a situation by demonstrating the power of nuclear weapons, the Putin government would be forced to do so. it cannot be said that it will not be used.
Ben Hodges, a former commander of the US military in Europe, acknowledged the risk, but said the chances of nuclear weapons actually being used were slim. “I don’t think Putin or his collaborators will resort to self-harming behavior because it doesn’t actually give them an advantage on the battlefield, and it’s impossible for the United States to sit back and do nothing.”
–
