Lessons from the desk of Vladimir Putin

Back in the good old days of the cold war the Soviet Union and the United States understood a very simple truth, without diplomacy there would be war. This is not to say that both sides had their respective fingers on the trigger, held back only by diplomats, just the opposite. The diplomats knew that should they fail to find compromise and a win-win solution both sides had a viable military and would, reluctantly, use it to protect its interest. They also knew that without the threat of the military option there would be no compromise and negotiations would go on forever. This last is true provided neither side had a viable military threat. If one side has a demonstrative military advantage and is known to have no qualms over using it, then negotiations become notifications as to the end state.

Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to have retained this lesion and understands that it goes further, not only the capability but the willingness to use your military is part of the calculus. Having tested the west he found it wanting. The lesson extends to friends and foe alike. Alliances become stronger when it is known your ally is assured of your actions.  While not a new friendship, Belarus is negotiating with Russia to allow a new air base and military instillation to be built in the former Soviet state. This base will bring Russian air power closer to Europe as well as Latvia, Lithuania and of course Ukraine. The lesson is not lost on the Wests friends either. The Syrian Kurds who have been fighting ISIS with US air support and some small weapons drops are now considering joining the Assad-Russian forces with a promise to extend Kurdish territory by connecting Kurdish Cantons, an action the US has refused to support. The United States recently called for talks over the Syrian crisis and invited Russia as well as Iran, both militarily engaged in Syria, and one of the first concessions made by the US was to drop the demand that President Assad must go before any peace is archived.  

The Russian war with Georgia over South Ossetia, Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its direct support of Ukrainian separatist have lead us now to the reemerging presence of Russia in the Middle East with Russian military support to Syria and diplomatic support to Iran. Further evidence of Russia’s return to a cold war mentality is a continuing testing of NATO and other western European defenses both in the air and at sea. Twenty-five years after the fall of the Berlin wall, we seem to have come full circle.

The West has forgotten the Cold War and what it pertained. The current rash of Russian aircraft and ships testing NATO defenses in conjunction with the Russian invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea, and the current move into the Middle East must be understood in an older context then the current batch of leaders appear willing or able to accept.

To be honest, Russia is doing just what they said they believe. Supporting the “legitimate” government in Syria is no different than supporting the “legitimate” government of Ukraine which they view as having been replaced by foreign influence. Beyond Putin’s concern is the concern of the Russian military in what is perceived as intentional destabilization by the west in regions of Russian influence. The concern revolves around what the military terms the “Color Revolutions.” These include the “Rose Revolution” in Georgia, the “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine, and the “Tulip Revolution” in Kyrgyzstan.  

Russia will continue to push and prod and be involved in combat operations until its objectives are met or until the price is too high. Lines must be drawn and aggression contained. If NATO and the West continue to fail to respond to Russian provocations, Russia will become more belligerent. Who is to blame? By failure to up the ante, we are giving Russia permission to continue its actions. Economic sanctions are not going to contain military action. Russia, as Putin envisions it, is capable of self-preservation. The West, as Putin envisions it, is incapable of sustaining an economic embargo against Europe’s energy supplier, especially if Russian actions in the Middle East drive up the price of oil.

The new cold war can only remain cold while there is a credible threat of actual war. Currently Russia does not see that threat. I do not advocate war, just the opposite. We need to set the boundaries, to let Russia know what the limits are. A new cold war is a terrible thing and should never have been allowed to happen. However, it did happen and now we must respond. If we learn from the past, we can contain war and avoid conflict. If we ignore what was learned the world may pay a terrible price.

Paul Davis is a retired US Army military intelligence and former Soviet analyst. He is a consultant to the American intelligence community specializing in the Middle East with a concentration on Kurdish affairs. Currently he is the President of the consulting firm JANUS Think in Washington D.C.