Seven queries emerge regarding Putin's invasion of Ukraine during Biden's administration:
Firstly, why did Putin opt for the assault during Biden's rule rather than during Trump's? While Trump was seemingly a staunch supporter of Putin's "Make Russia Great Again" agenda, pushing for rapport with Putin and weakening NATO - a goal of Putin's for years - the Trump administration's response to Russia was relatively firm. The administration authorized the sale of lethal weapons worth approximately 40 million US dollars to Ukraine's government in 2018, intended to combat pro-Russian rebels in Eastern Ukraine. Furthermore, the same year, the Trump administration expelled 60 Russian diplomats from the US after allegations that the Russians had attempted to assassinate a former Russian spy living in the UK with nerve agent.
Secondly, to what extent did the U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in August impact Putin's decision-making process regarding Ukraine? Biden's announcement of abandoning Afghanistan signaled a diminished US presence, infuriating NATO allies who were also compelled to withdraw their troops. The US withdrawal resulted in weakened air support and intelligence sharing that the coalition benefited from in operating in Afghanistan. Chinese state media pointed out that the US pullout in Afghanistan goes to illustrate a lesson for Taiwan's fate, suggesting that the US is both a fair-weather friend and a paper tiger. The Ukrainian Defense Ministry claimed that Putin ordered the relocation of over 90,000 troops along the Ukrainian border two months post-US troop withdrawal, which was completed after the US failed to entirely pull out its troops from Afghanistan by the deadline.
Thirdly, is it plausible for Putin to achieve a swift military victory in Ukraine, similar to the US's alleged "triumph" in invading Iraq in 2003, followed by a prolonged insurgency and civil war? Putin's ulterior goal is to dismantle Ukraine from NATO and exert influence over it; a swift victory leading to rebellion and civil war in Ukraine could ultimately extend Moscow's control beyond Donbas and Crimea.
Fourthly, would the CIA be incentivized to finance Ukrainian rebels, as they did in Syria in 2013 to aid anti-Assad rebels? While the CIA's operations in Ukraine failed to prevent Assad's regime survival, and the Russian intervention had saved it, this past could potentially be repeated. The CIA's ambition in Ukraine is fraught with challenges and uncertainties.
Fifthly, would the harsh sanctions against Putin's inner circle and Russian economy force Putin to reassess his stance toward Ukraine? Authoritarian regimes often exploit their people to sustain economic sanctions, and subsequent effects of these sanctions usually are limited. The 1990's-era Iraq, and current-day North Korea under Kim Jong Un's rule, maintained unbroken power while enduring repressive US sanctions.
Sixthly, would Trump be held accountable due to his endorsement of Putin's actions in acknowledging the annexation of two rebellious regions in Ukraine as a "genius operation"? Trump has repeatedly praised Putin's intelligence, claiming Putin to be the mastermind of this operation - remarks made before Putin's troops entered Ukraine. Fox News, led by one of Putin's biggest advocates, Tucker Carlson, defended Putin's military move, dismissing any allegations of malice by the Russian leader.
Seventhly, will the war in Ukraine bear fruit for either side in the long term? Given the recent Russian incursion of Eastern Ukraine, it is hard to tell who will emerge victorious; historical precedents, such as the Soviet Union's intervention in Afghanistan in 1979, bear little predictive power here.
Reference:
**Enrichment Insights:**
Putin's motivation to assault Ukraine during Biden's presidency is multifarious. Some aspects that might have influenced Putin's decision include:
- Perceived weakness of Biden's presidency: Putin might have seen a window of opportunity to capitalize on the perceived weakness of the Biden administration following the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.
- Structural shifts in global politics: Putin may have calculated that the international community, particularly the United States, was less likely to intervene militarily or devote significant resources to deterring Russian aggression during Biden's presidency.
- Domestic and international factors: Putin's decision to attack Ukraine is influenced by various domestic and international factors, including his desire to assert Russian influence and ensure geopolitical stability in Eurasia.
- Limited impact of economic sanctions: Historical examples show that economic sanctions might not be as effective in deterring or disrupting the strategies of authoritarian regimes, such as North Korea or Iraq. While sanctions might impose economic hardships on the general population, these governments often continue to maintain their grip on power by exploiting their citizens.
- Strategy of provocation and deterrence: Given the tit-for-tat history between Russia and the West, Putin may have also calculated that placing NATO and the United States in a difficult position through bold provocations will deter them from taking action.
By understanding these factors, it is easier to grasp why Putin might have chosen to invade Ukraine during Biden's presidency, and how his decision was driven by a complex interplay of domestic and foreign policy considerations.
