Andrei Piontkovsky is a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute, living in Washington DC. He is one of the world's biggest and best-known putinologists, whose analyses are not always pleasant, but they are accurate. He predicted the current trajectory of Russia under Putin a long time ago.
How do you assess the current situation in Ukraine and its possible development? The Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukrainian diplomats, politicians, repeat in every interview, in every speech, that they are dealing with the adversary on the ground, but that to hold on, US and NATO need to establish a no-fly zone over Ukraine.
This is a crucial issue for world history. If there is no no-fly zone, then, despite all the heroic resistance of Ukraine, it will be destroyed after a while. Putin has no limits. Neither moral nor legal. He can easily do to Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities what he did to Grozny and Aleppo [these cities were literally destroyed]. This will not be the end of it. After Ukraine is destroyed, he will undoubtedly go for the Baltics, again blackmailing the world with nuclear weapons. The West are unable to understand this obvious truth in any way. You probably have noticed that the attitude of the West towards Putin has changed sharply in the last week. There is an avalanche of decisions being taken that they could not make up their minds about before. Sanctions, the cancellation of Nord Stream 2, the expulsion of Russia from all fields of sport, culture and so on. They have finally realized that Putin is Hitler with atom bombs. However, they have not drawn the necessary conclusions from this realization. I can't stand the chain of statements by Biden: the boots of NATO soldiers will never touch [they will not fight on] Ukrainian soil. Well, all right. Ukraine is not a NATO member. That is why it was not admitted to NATO, so as not to have to defend it. Biden confuses cause with effect. That is why the Western powers did not admit Ukraine to NATO, because they feared the prospect of war with Russia. Now this idea has been supplemented by another phrase: we will never establish a no-fly zone because that creates the risk of war with a nuclear-weapon state. But to make himself look respectable, he adds a third phrase, which is particularly important for you in Latvia: but we will respect the obligations of Article 5 of NATO. He has even invented a new phrase: we will fight for every inch of NATO land. Unfortunately, the combination of these three phrases is a combination of blatant contradictions. There is no no-fly zone because he is afraid of a military conflict with a nuclear-weapon state. But if there is no no-fly zone, Ukraine will be destroyed. I have been accused of underestimating the strength of the Ukrainian army, but the same was said today by a man who is very well versed in military affairs - Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett. This was a rather unexpected statement because Israel has always tried to maintain good relations with Putin in order to cooperate in Syria. Bennett said that if the countries of the world do not take decisive steps soon, Ukraine will be destroyed. Inspired by the destruction of Ukraine, Putin will go for the Baltics. And then what will Biden say? I am not sure that he will keep his promises.
Why are you so sure that Putin will escalate and go specifically for the Baltic States?
I have been watching Putin's behavior and way of thinking closely, studying it for a quarter of a century, and I am convinced that as long as he remains in power he will not abandon two central ideas: 1) the abolition of the artificially created non-state [Ukraine], jointly created (in Putin's mind) by the Austro-Hungarian General Staff and the Bolsheviks; 2) convincing revenge on the West after the USSR lost World War III (the Cold War). This means that Putin will not settle for anything less than the elimination of Ukrainian statehood, but this will not fully satisfy his heightened ambitions anyway. He craves a public humiliation of the West (NATO). It is therefore naive to expect Putin to stop with the conquest of Ukraine. He will go all the way. One only has to look at a map to tell who his next victim will be. Zelensky also keeps repeating this.
You said that you are not sure that Biden will keep his promise to trigger Article 5. Why?
By triggering Article 5, the conditions remain the same - he is not only accepting the risk of collision with a nuclear-weapon state, but he is already directly engaging in a military conflict with a nuclear-weapon state. Putin, after all, is threatening with nuclear weapons in a targeted and consistent manner. Openly and clearly. Three times in the last month. The most threatening was his speech on February 6 at the press conference after his meeting with Macron. Yes, he said, we are lagging behind NATO in conventional weapons. This was unexpected because Putin never admits that Russia is lagging behind. Yes, we understand perfectly well that NATO is stronger in conventional weapons, he said, and immediately added: but we have nuclear weapons, and in some ways, they are the most advanced in the world. He is either lying about the advanced nature of some of these weapons, or he has been convinced of it by those who make a living out of developing them. There are no new advanced designs and nothing new has been invented in nuclear strategy. Putin's advantage lies not in the advances of nuclear weapons, but in his willingness to use them. To risk, and also to sacrifice, the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. Or millions. So, in summary, the West is now making a colossal, fatal strategic mistake. The West is leaving Ukraine to be destroyed in order to avoid a military clash with a nuclear-weapon state. But in this way, the problem is only postponed. It is pushed back a little later. The very day after Ukraine's surrender, Putin will immediately remember the violations of the rights of Russian speakers in Estonia, Latvia, etc.
What should be done?
What is absolutely necessary now is a no-fly zone. Yes, it is a risk, but there will always be a risk. It will not go away.
There is an idea that Putin could use tactical nuclear strikes to force Ukraine to capitulate. This was implied by the statement made by Sergey Naryshkin, Director of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, at a meeting of the Russian Security Council on Thursday that, lo and behold, Ukraine is developing its own nuclear missiles and the US is actively helping them with this. And if they are developing them, they must be stopped preemptively.
Yes, that is one of their dumb fake news, which they, including Putin, repeat regularly, based on one awkward phrase uttered by Zelensky at the Munich conference. At the moment, Putin has no need to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. He can destroy Ukraine with conventional weapons. I repeat, he can turn Kyiv into Grozny or Aleppo without nuclear weapons. But you have to understand something else. The most important thing. Putin does not want an all-out nuclear war in which the whole world, including himself, would die. He needs nuclear weapons to demonstratively humiliate the West. The rough scenario is this: he comes to Estonia. Seizes Narva. Suppose Biden fulfils his sacred promise and NATO comes to the rescue. Putin himself has admitted that NATO has superiority in conventional weapons. NATO starts to force Russia out. At this point, Putin declares that if you do not immediately step away from the line that I will tell you about or have already told you in my December ultimatum, then nuclear weapons will go into action. I will launch a tactical nuclear strike, maybe even two. One on a place where US troops are concentrated, and one on a European city. Maybe Warsaw, which I dislike the most. Putin's calculation is simple: to this ultimatum, the West will cower and capitulate. Effectively withdrawing from the world historical stage. That is his central task and objective. That is why he does not need to waste nuclear weapons on Ukraine.
You live in Washington. Does the US political establishment and public opinion in general understand the gravity of the situation?
You can see how attitudes are changing. The position of Biden and his administration today was completely unthinkable just a few months ago. He met with Putin, he made concessions to Putin, he pressed the Ukrainians to honor the Minsk agreement. There was a struggle in Washington between [Secretary of State Antony] Blinken and [Secretary of Defense Lloyd] Austin on the one hand and Putin's man, the classic Putinfehrshtehn in European classification, [National Security Advisor Jake] Sullivan, on the other. Now that fight is over and there is unanimous support throughout US politics for a hard anti-Russian line and for aid to Ukraine. But! Biden has just spoken to Congress. The speech was excellent. Half of it was devoted to Ukraine. Several times everyone got to their feet and gave him a standing ovation. The First Lady hugged the wife of the Ukrainian ambassador. But the speech ended with the same stupid phrases: no boots on the ground in Ukraine, let's not set a no-fly zone, but let's respect Article 5. They are cunningly deceiving. They are terribly unwilling to take that risk. They will let you down. They think that they will not have to keep these promises. They think that Putin will get stuck in Ukraine. They hope that somehow Putin will break his neck in Ukraine. The plan is this. Already, the war is not going as planned for Putin. The blitzkrieg has failed. If the Ukrainian resistance drags on for, say, another month, discontent in Russia will grow. They are hoping that the break will come from this combination of two factors - fierce Ukrainian resistance and growing discontent in Russia. Moreover, it is not discontent at the grassroots level that is important, but in the elite, in the military, in the administrative apparatus, in order to create the conditions for a successful coup d'état. They want to save themselves by hiding behind the backs of the Ukrainians, without putting themselves at risk, while reciting the mantra that they will certainly defend the Baltics. I am afraid they will not. That is why everything will be decided now in Ukraine. The scenario is this: a no-fly zone is established. Yes, a Russian plane is shot down. The [Russia-NATO] war starts. First with conventional weapons, where, as Putin admitted, the Americans have the upper hand. Putin declares: if you do not stop this immediately, if you do not lift the no-fly zone, then I will use tactical nuclear weapons. But the Pentagon already considered this strategic probability several years ago and, under General Mattis, drew up "A Strategy for Deterring Russian Nuclear De-Escalation Strikes: Limited Nuclear Reprisal", which clearly states the answer: to your tactical nuclear strike, we will respond with the same. This will be clearly explained to Putin. I am convinced that it must be explained to him now, because all Putin's insolence is based on his deep conviction that the Americans will be frightened and will not respond. By introducing a no-fly zone in Ukraine now, NATO would be in a much better position than if it had to respond to Putin's ultimatum when he is already in the Baltic States. At the moment, such a move would have a huge moral superiority for the US. They are not going to war. They are carrying out a humanitarian mission - saving civilians from Russian airstrikes. At the same time as the no-fly zone, a clear warning must be given to Russia that we know your plans, but we also have an answer, which you also know. We will respond. There will be no capitulation. It is imperative to add another thing that is playing in our favor. The Russian military is very skeptical about all these Putin's plans. They were already against an invasion of this scale before the invasion. Putin imposed it on the military.
Unfortunately, neither the Chief of the General Staff, Valery Gerasimov, nor the Minister for Defense, Sergei Shoigu, are making the decisions.
You will note that shortly before the outbreak of the war, there were a number of strong articles and statements by high-ranking, but now retired, military officers against a large-scale invasion of Ukraine. General Ivashov, Hodaryonok and others. These are people who were still working in the General Staff yesterday. There is no doubt that they were acting on behalf of their colleagues who are still in the service. These articles express the real mood in the General Staff. Now, after all these failures, tensions may well be building in the army. It is similar to Hitler. The army, after all, was always against Hitler. Before the annexation of Czech provinces, even before the Anschluss, and even before the entry into the Rhine area, they were against it. They plotted conspiracies, but every time they failed and they themselves started to think, perhaps Hitler really is a genius who succeeds in everything? The military is often less aggressive than civilians because they understand the consequences of war perfectly. The West, by giving Ukraine to be torn apart, is taking away from the army the arguments to stand up to Putin, because he can say - well, you see, I told you they would chicken out. And they will do that next time as well. Whoever has shown cowardice once will always do so again. I ask you: do the leaders of the Baltic States understand what we are talking about here? We need the three of them to go to Washington now as a matter of urgency and explain to Biden what will happen next. Putin needs to be stopped now. By being afraid to intervene today, this intervention is being made inevitable in the very near future. Only at a much greater disadvantage for Biden. We must all try to prevent World War III by saying these things out loud.