Putin's fate

  I am not a foreign policy expert.

Many are. I am not.

Nor am I an 'expert' who has found evidence to back up a pre-established point of view, formed in an armchair in front of a screen during the COVID-19 pandemic.

I am someone who reads and who listens. I have spent the last ten years reading and listening to the views of experts, throwing them all together in a melting pot and forming my own opinion. Below is that opinion  - the potential outcomes of Russia's invasion into Ukraine. Neither of them, I'm afraid to say, end well for Putin and all of them will see further suffering.

Putin's Ukraine campaign has gone badly. By no metric has he succeeded: Ukraine and other Russian-bordering nations have accelerated campaigns to join NATO/EU, a seemingly divided 'West' has come together to impose harsh sanctions on Russia and its economy and Ukraine and its elected governments stand firm. Even the conflict's hotly contested number of military casualties suggest that the Russian campaign is struggling, while images of Ukrainian farmers capturing Russian tanks continue to circulate online. At home, too, Putin's actions are under scrutiny. News channels in the UK are full of news of arrests on the streets of Russia - citizens who disagree with the war, whether morally or because they (eventually...) cannot get a McDonald's. This leads to the first potential outcome of the campaign.

Vlad-ios

Putin's control  of the Russian people is two-fold. The influence he has in the media, and the church, and those who his regime has allowed to become rich. Two factors that combine to suppress free speech and free thought. However, as Western sanctions take hold, the latter such influence will begin to wane. Putin - and the type of regime he runs - is of benefit to oligarchs and wealthy Russians only insofar as their wealth is allowed to build. It will not take long until the link between Putin's actions and a loss of wealth is made clear - Western sanctions. 

For this, the EU/US/uk/all who issue sanctions deserve credit. Yes, the withdrawal of Coca-Cola and greatly reduced amounts of Russian oil/gas entering nations reduces the state - and thus the military's - war chest, but its real benefit lies in the pressure it places on the bank accounts of those who have propped up Putin for more than two decades.

Ordinary Russians are affected by Putin's campaign too. Even those who are unable to understand or even believe what is going on (I recommend this BBC News article - as fascinating as it is scary) are feeling the strain of sanctions and closures. Even if one ignores the fact that many have a sense of right and wrong or are worried about losing their family to war, not being able to stream Netflix or buy a Big Mac will have an impact on many.

And so, eventually, maybe six months from now, Putin will find himself in trouble. Whether there is an attempt on his life supported by society at large or a coup, Putin's days would be numbered. An army that ought to be furious about how their lives are being wasted is unlikely to want to fight for Putin, while the oligarchs no longer have anything to gain by protecting him from the Russians who have moral concerns over the war.

Off the ramp(age)

The American media, with the help of military and security services have coined a delightfully irritating term: 'off-ramp.' In case you are not sure what this means, it is intended to mean a face-saving route out of the war. Putin's campaign has three possible outcomes:

• Victory - read below for why this is impossible.
• Cliff-edge - he surrenders and is left a failure, having nothing to sell to his nation as a 'compromise'. This would most certainly see the end of Putin's tenure in Russia.
• Off-ramp - Putin loses, but is given an 'off-ramp.' Would allow him to call off the war and address the Russian people with words to the effect of: 'the war may be over but it was not without gains. I have managed to secure...'

Many believe the latter is the only solution that prevents a nuclear war - victory being impossible and a cliff-edge giving Putin as much a country to govern as if he blows it up. Put simply, an off-ramp stops the war and the suffering and keeps Putin in power. It's a form of appeasement - though hopefully one that can be controlled better than historically. 

It remains to be seen what such an off-ramp would involve, other than some astonishing negotiation. It is tough to see what could be acceptable enough to Putin as to provide an off-ramp (ie something he feels he could present to his people without being assasinated) while also being little enough as to keep the Ukrainians happy. Recognition of the Crimea as Russian has been suggested in some parts of the wider press and while this is more feasible than other ideas - it would simply be formal recognition of the current situation - one could forgive the Ukrainians for not feeling overly generous with their sovereignty.

Why a victory is impossible

There seems now to be a perception of Putin's war as being impossible to win. While this is correct, it has nothing to do with the disrupted fuel supplies and lack of planning that have been widely reported to have hampered the invasion thus far.

The simple truth is that Putin is yet to state what his aim in Ukraine is. Wars, like arguments over the dinner table, cannot be won without clarity over what that would involve. The pretexts of Crimea and recognising separatist-led regions of Ukraine are clearly false - there'd be no need to shell Kyiv if this was the true objective, but it is tough to see what the end goal is. We have been lead to believe that Putin feels threatened by NATO expansion, as well as that of the EU. In which case it makes little sense that he would try to seize control of Ukraine - bordered by nations in both NATO and the EU.

Putin is not stupid. Ukraine has thus far been a convenient buffer between his Russia and NATO/EU. He would be foolish to remove that.

Even if it were to become apparent that Putin's goal was to take Ukraine, the most he could do is win the battle for it. The wider war would wage on. Make no mistake, Russia could not govern Ukraine. There has been next to no democratic desire for closer ties with Russia since Ukraine gained its independence more than 30 years ago. Its unwillingness to surrender to Moscow should sound a warning to Russia - you cannot take the country and doing so would be the beginning of the end.

Putin is in trouble. I fear it is only a matter of time before an off-ramp is extended or he is removed from the presidency. The West should be afraid, however. There is no guarantee that a new leader would be more Ukraine/NATO friendly, while the return of fears of nuclear armageddon - consigned to history, many thought - should provoke major anxiety.

JP IX·III·MMXXII