Everyone professes to have trouble analyzing Vladimir Putin, current President of the Russian Federation. Perhaps Christopher Hitchens had the best broad stroke guess when he said "KGB goon." If that alienates Russians who admire the way Mr. Putin has led Russia during the past 14 years, then so be it. There are many questions about Putin in regards to Ukraine. Where is he and the Russian leadership going to go next? How can they develop this situation into something positive over the long term? The operation in Crimea, as opportunist as it was, was a master stroke. If Russia could have stopped there, it should have. An important geographic area to the Russian psyche was relatively secure with little effort. What became very clear is that Russia tying itself to Russian nationalists in Ukraine was probably a mistake. They are, by nature of being loose militias, going to be less disciplined and more unpredictable. Much like the Serbian nationalist militias of the 90s, atrocities are quite possible. So as much as making Ukraine into a frozen conflict could support a Russian narrative of an ideological battle, it is not a good idea. Ukraine has gained much more visibility than Moldova and Transnistria. Putin is fairly pragmatic. In a way it is surprising to see him get as emotional as he does about Crimea. He seems to be fairly astute at making decisions without a lot of ardor or passion. The pragmatic step is going to be to distance the Kremlin from the passionate nationalism that itself inspired. The consequence of not doing so means being identified with terrible acts, such as shooting down the commercial airliner, MH 17.
No comments:
Post a Comment