Washington Looking To Solve the ‘Putin Equation’
Published in Le Figaro
(France) on 19 February 2014
by Laure Mandeville (link to original)
(France) on 19 February 2014
by Laure Mandeville (link to original)
Translated from
by Axel Ndianabo.
Edited by Gillian Palmer.
In fact, Russia represents the central background of what is happening in Kiev.
Ukraine has caught fire, but neither the United States nor Europe seem to be credible firefighters. Instead, they appear to be sad and helpless spectators who can only remotely try to influence the situation in Ukraine, one that is more dangerous than ever. Calls from Vice President Joe Biden to “remove government forces from the streets” and engage in an “immediate dialogue” with the opposition during a conversation with President Yanukovych on Tuesday night can hardly conceal the facts that stand out. The United States has been almost absent from the battle that is being fought in Kiev for the future of Ukraine, failing to provide some muscle to a divided Europe.
Throughout the Obama administration, there has been a deliberate distancing from Russia’s neighboring countries. Scalded by the Russia-Georgia war of 2008, the White House decided that it would not repeat Bush’s mistakes, considering he had pushed Georgia to a dangerous geopolitical confrontation with Moscow without being able to have Georgia’s back until the end. Obama decided to “reset” Russian policy in order to establish a targeted cooperation with Putin, over Iran and Afghanistan for instance. Five years later, nobody in Washington is talking about a “reset.” Between the case of Snowden and the conflict in Syria, where Russia is holding the Assad regime at arm’s length, Putin has turned into a real diplomatic headache for Washington. In reality, however, the United States has deprived itself of the necessary cards to be able to influence the crisis in Kiev. Behind the Ukraine equation, the United States sees the Putin equation reviving.
Putin is, in fact, the central background of what is happening in Kiev. Without him and the $15 billion bailout he offered, Viktor Yanukovych would have never dared to turn down the association agreement that the European Union had offered him. He probably wouldn’t have launched a Berkut special forces assault on the Independence Square. While claiming not to be interfering with the situation, the Kremlin has admitted that the two men had spoken in the evening. There is a de facto alliance between Yanukovych and Putin. Yanukovych started the repression in order to save his regime. Putin is encouraging him because if Ukraine turns to the West, his own authoritarian regime will find itself weakened and his prospects of reconstructing an empire around Russia will be impossible.
“Toward a Civil War”
The fear of losing everything is why Kremlin-controlled media have unleashed a wave of anti-American and anti-European propaganda, supporting the idea that the West was behind all the violence on Tuesday. Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is speaking of an “attempted coup” orchestrated by the West …. “The term ‘terrorists,’ used to describe the protesters, seeks to dehumanize the opposition, to justify the repression and discredit any eventual Western-led mediation,” says Brookings analyst Fiona Hill, who does not exclude a “plunge toward a civil war.” “This game is proving difficult for the West, as we are playing a 21st-century game by offering an association agreement to Ukraine. On the other hand, Putin is playing a 19th-century game, resorting to force, ruse and propaganda. The game is not fair,”* indicates Hill.
Among the many options that the United States could go for in order to balance out the situation, appear to be Ukrainian elites, including powerful oligarchs such as Rinat Akhmetov, who condemned the repression, despite his former relationship with Yanukovych. These elites have no interest in a bloodbath and know better than anyone that behind Putin’s political virtuosity lies a corrupted and messy Russia.
*Editor's Note: The quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.
Ukraine has caught fire, but neither the United States nor Europe seem to be credible firefighters. Instead, they appear to be sad and helpless spectators who can only remotely try to influence the situation in Ukraine, one that is more dangerous than ever. Calls from Vice President Joe Biden to “remove government forces from the streets” and engage in an “immediate dialogue” with the opposition during a conversation with President Yanukovych on Tuesday night can hardly conceal the facts that stand out. The United States has been almost absent from the battle that is being fought in Kiev for the future of Ukraine, failing to provide some muscle to a divided Europe.
Throughout the Obama administration, there has been a deliberate distancing from Russia’s neighboring countries. Scalded by the Russia-Georgia war of 2008, the White House decided that it would not repeat Bush’s mistakes, considering he had pushed Georgia to a dangerous geopolitical confrontation with Moscow without being able to have Georgia’s back until the end. Obama decided to “reset” Russian policy in order to establish a targeted cooperation with Putin, over Iran and Afghanistan for instance. Five years later, nobody in Washington is talking about a “reset.” Between the case of Snowden and the conflict in Syria, where Russia is holding the Assad regime at arm’s length, Putin has turned into a real diplomatic headache for Washington. In reality, however, the United States has deprived itself of the necessary cards to be able to influence the crisis in Kiev. Behind the Ukraine equation, the United States sees the Putin equation reviving.
Putin is, in fact, the central background of what is happening in Kiev. Without him and the $15 billion bailout he offered, Viktor Yanukovych would have never dared to turn down the association agreement that the European Union had offered him. He probably wouldn’t have launched a Berkut special forces assault on the Independence Square. While claiming not to be interfering with the situation, the Kremlin has admitted that the two men had spoken in the evening. There is a de facto alliance between Yanukovych and Putin. Yanukovych started the repression in order to save his regime. Putin is encouraging him because if Ukraine turns to the West, his own authoritarian regime will find itself weakened and his prospects of reconstructing an empire around Russia will be impossible.
“Toward a Civil War”
The fear of losing everything is why Kremlin-controlled media have unleashed a wave of anti-American and anti-European propaganda, supporting the idea that the West was behind all the violence on Tuesday. Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is speaking of an “attempted coup” orchestrated by the West …. “The term ‘terrorists,’ used to describe the protesters, seeks to dehumanize the opposition, to justify the repression and discredit any eventual Western-led mediation,” says Brookings analyst Fiona Hill, who does not exclude a “plunge toward a civil war.” “This game is proving difficult for the West, as we are playing a 21st-century game by offering an association agreement to Ukraine. On the other hand, Putin is playing a 19th-century game, resorting to force, ruse and propaganda. The game is not fair,”* indicates Hill.
Among the many options that the United States could go for in order to balance out the situation, appear to be Ukrainian elites, including powerful oligarchs such as Rinat Akhmetov, who condemned the repression, despite his former relationship with Yanukovych. These elites have no interest in a bloodbath and know better than anyone that behind Putin’s political virtuosity lies a corrupted and messy Russia.
*Editor's Note: The quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.
Next article![]( "The Disunited States")
