Paul Goble
Staunton,
December 2 – Given what Moscow says are its goals in Ukraine, Ilya Kramnik
says, it is unlikely to try to occupy that country or try to install its agent
in power in Kyiv. Instead, “the most probable scenario of a war” will involve
an aggressive air campaign” where Russia will play the role NATO did in
Yugoslavia.
“The
key goal of such an operation,” the Moscow military analyst says, “would be to
deprive Kyiv of the chance to affect” what could then occur in the regions
which Moscow wants to see have much greater autonomy than they do now including
the ability to interact directly with the Russian Federation (profile.ru/politika/item/128415-tuman-vojny).
Of course,
he acknowledges, “to predict the course and end of military operations should
Russia and Ukraine really enter into a direct armed conflict is thankless in
principle and completely senseless if the person making the prediction doesn’t
know what the goals are: of both sides, something Kramnik says he “doesn’t
pretend” to have.
Nonetheless,
“we certainly can,” he says, “based on the declarations of Russian officials
offer what Moscow’s goals will be. The Russian leadership will remain true to
its officially declared priority,” the maintenance of the territorial integrity
and sovereignty of Ukraine within the borders Russia currently recognizes,
“that is, without Crimea and Sevastopol.”
“At
the same time, one can reasonably presuppose,” he says, “that Moscow will seek
to ensure the reform of the Ukrainian state structure,” and relations between
Kyiv and the regions in particular. Moscow wants to see “the political weight”
of the latter to increase, “including the definition of ethnic and language
policies and also external economic ties.”
Given
that, it is clear the strategy in any such conflict Moscow “must not adopt.” A
drive to occupy Ukraine and install a new ruler in Kyiv “has no sense: this
would not solve any of the long-term terms” Moscow has set for itself in that
country. Instead, it needs to adopt a
strategy designed to block Kyiv from using force in the regions.
There
is a model for such a strategy: NATO’s air campaign against Belgrade in
Yugoslavia. In Ukraine, of course,
“Russia would play the role of NATO,” Kramnik says. It would seek to limit
Kyiv’s ability to move forces to counter political actions in the regions and
to do so primarily via air power.
“Such
an approach,” the Moscow analyst says,, “is completely real considering the
composition and military capacity of the air forces of the Russian Federation
and the high probability that they would deprive Kyiv” of the chance to impose
its will on the regions and thus “force it to reach an agreement with the
regions.”
Ukrainian forces would not be able to counter such an
approach effectively, he says, especially after two or three days of the start
of such an operation. It simply wouldn’t have the resources to respond. Russia could destroy Ukrainian air bases and
then turn its attention to military units that Kyiv might try to dispatch to
the regions.
If
Moscow did need to use ground forces, Kramnik says, it could make use of the
ones which already exist in the Donbass rather than having to bring new forces
in. “The fate of Ukraine in case of the successful realization of this strategy
is quite cloudy – having been deprived of the instruments of force, Kyiv would
sharply lose its political weight.
Indeed,
for a future Ukraine, preservation “even in the form of a confederation would
be an enormous success.” If some regions
revolted against the central government, Moscow would certainly move to make
sure that Kyiv couldn’t respond militarily against them and that might lead
some of them to go their own ways.
Any
plan has to include “reserve variants” in case things change. If Ukraine did get
aid from the West and especially Western forces, “the Russian military leadership
would have to despite its lack of a desire to do so introduce forces onto the
territory of Ukraine,” first of all in “historic Novorossiya” and then in
Kharkiv, Zaporzh and Dniprpetrovsk oblasts.
That
would be necessary, Kramnik says, to “guarantee the right of the population of
these oblasts to independently decide on their future like this was done in
Crimea and Sevastopol in February-March 2014.” Talking about other alternatives
involves too many unknowns to be useful, he suggests
No comments:
Post a Comment