Putin’s Dangerous Dream – USA Gov Policy

At a speech in Helsinki last week, US Secretary of State Tony Blinken said that “When you look at President Putin’s long-term strategic aims and objectives, there is no question: Russia is significantly worse off today than it was before its full-scale invasion of Ukraine – militarily, economically, geopolitically.” While that may be true from one perspective, another looms on the horizon that needs to be addressed by Western leaders.

In the next year Russia is likely to have a greater impact on the West and global trade than in recent decades, while also emerging as more dangerous threat to the democratic West, than acknowledged by the Biden Administration. A cornered and weak Putin, according to intelligence analysts in Washington, is capable of striking out with great force against those who oppose his goal of reconstituting the Russian Empire. He’s getting encouragement from Chinese leader Xi Jinping, who benefits from Russia’s keeping the West engaged outside of Asia. Unlike the earlier Soviet era, China is the more dominant partner coaxing Russia into geopolitical challenges that benefit Beijing’s global ambitions. One region of interest to both Russia and China is the Arctic and the potential year-round opening of the Northern Sea Route (NSR).

In a recent video conference, the Russian president called the NSR “extremely important” to Russia as its potential year round opening fulfills a dream first envisioned three centuries ago by Tsar Peter the Great… an all-water route from the Barents Sea to the Pacific through his empire’s coastal Arctic waters. Mike Shuler, writing in the maritime publication GCaptain, says that Russia’s Minister for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic, Alexei Chekunkov, reported that freight traffic along the NSR already has increased from 4 million tons in 2014 to 34 million tons last year, making it a major transport corridor for the export of oil, LNG, minerals, fertilizers, metals, and other products.

It will require an upgrade of the region’s infrastructure, from cargo hubs and ports to additional Russian icebreakers and ice-class ships, according to Chekunkov. Technological advances in navigation and steel-hulled icebreakers, along with today’s powerful maritime engines and global trade environment, make the Arctic a highly prized transport highway. Ninety years after Otto Shmidt’s expedition sailed the first Soviet icebreaker, Aleksandr Sibiriakov, through the Arctic from Arkhangel’sk to the Bering Strait without wintering, it appears Putin will be fulfilling the earlier dream of Peter the Great, only now Russia will not be the only nation to benefit from the NSR. China stands to gain in many ways since Putin has placed the NSR under Rosatomflot’s control 13 months ago. The West will be increasingly occupied with Russia’s Arctic plans and China will acquire a new shorter passageway to the Atlantic Ocean, European markets, and the American East coast.

Sanctions stimulated Russia to seek new avenues for its exports and elevated development of the NSR to a high priority, with China’s backing. Rosatom CEO Alexei Likhachev met with Putin recently to discuss the region. He confirmed that “Together with Novatek, we are planning to launch year-round navigation in the eastern part of the NRS next year.” Despite sanctions on Russia, the NSR will play an important global trade role for energy importing nations, such as China, India, Japan, South Korea, and Southeast Asia. John Daly, of the Jamestown Foundation says that “Since 2013, COSCO Shipping, China’s largest shipping company, has made more than 20 transit voyages along the route, escorted by Russian Rosatomflot nuclear icebreakers.” While many economic constraints exists for the route’s development, China has shown an interest in asserting itself in the region.

“Impelled by 11 rounds of unwanted Western sanctions, Chekunkov said that his department’s goal is to ensure that the NSR can transit up to 100 million tons by 2026 and 200 million tons by 2030,” according to Daly. Putin needs Beijing’s interest in the NSR for financial reasons. For Beijing, the NSR is the single guaranteed secure maritime transport corridor if the United States and its allies try to block China’s Pacific trade routes. Russia and China want a trade route. One question is what else is China after by pushing for the NSR? The world may know as soon as next year.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.