OPINION
GUEST ESSAY
Putin Is Making a Historic Mistake
Feb. 23,
2022, 1:00 a.m. ET
By
Madeleine Albright
Dr.
Albright served as the U.S. secretary of state from 1997 to 2001.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/opinion/putin-ukraine.html
In early
2000, I became the first senior U.S. official to meet with Vladimir Putin in
his new capacity as acting president of Russia. We in the Clinton
administration did not know much about him at the time — just that he had
started his career in the K.G.B. I hoped the meeting would help me take the
measure of the man and assess what his sudden elevation might mean for
U.S.-Russia relations, which had deteriorated amid the war in Chechnya. Sitting
across a small table from him in the Kremlin, I was immediately struck by the
contrast between Mr. Putin and his bombastic predecessor, Boris Yeltsin.
Whereas Mr.
Yeltsin had cajoled, blustered and flattered, Mr. Putin spoke unemotionally and
without notes about his determination to resurrect Russia’s economy and quash
Chechen rebels. Flying home, I recorded my impressions. “Putin is small and
pale,” I wrote, “so cold as to be almost reptilian.” He claimed to understand
why the Berlin Wall had to fall but had not expected the whole Soviet Union to
collapse. “Putin is embarrassed by what happened to his country and determined
to restore its greatness.”
I have been
reminded in recent months of that nearly three-hour session with Mr. Putin as
he has massed troops on the border with neighboring Ukraine. After calling Ukrainian
statehood a fiction in a bizarre televised address, he issued a decree
recognizing the independence of two separatist-held regions in Ukraine and
sending troops there.
Mr. Putin’s
revisionist and absurd assertion that Ukraine was “entirely created by Russia”
and effectively robbed from the Russian empire is fully in keeping with his
warped worldview. Most disturbing to me: It was his attempt to establish the
pretext for a full-scale invasion.
Should he
do so, it will be a historic error.
In the
20-odd years since we met, Mr. Putin has charted his course by ditching
democratic development for Stalin’s playbook. He has collected political and
economic power for himself — co-opting or crushing potential competition —
while pushing to re-establish a sphere of Russian dominance through parts of
the former Soviet Union. Like other authoritarians, he equates his own
well-being with that of the nation and opposition with treason. He is sure that
Americans mirror both his cynicism and his lust for power and that in a world
where everyone lies, he is under no obligation to tell the truth. Because he
believes that the United States dominates its own region by force, he thinks
Russia has the same right.
Mr. Putin
has for years sought to burnish his country’s international reputation, expand
Russia’s military and economic might, weaken NATO and divide Europe (while
driving a wedge between it and the United States). Ukraine features in all of
that.
Instead of
paving Russia’s path to greatness, invading Ukraine would ensure Mr. Putin’s
infamy by leaving his country diplomatically isolated, economically crippled
and strategically vulnerable in the face of a stronger, more united Western
alliance.
He’s
already set that in motion by announcing on Monday his decision to recognize
the two separatist enclaves in Ukraine and send in Russian troops as
“peacemakers.” Now he has demanded that it recognize Russia’s claim to Crimea
and relinquish its advanced weapons.
Mr. Putin’s
actions have triggered massive sanctions, with more to come if he launches a
full-scale assault and attempts to seize the entire country. These would
devastate not just his country’s economy but also his tight circle of corrupt
cronies — who in turn could challenge his leadership. What is sure to be a
bloody and catastrophic war will drain Russian resources and cost Russian lives
— while creating an urgent incentive for Europe to slash its dangerous reliance
on Russian energy. (That has already begun with Germany’s move to halt
certification of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline.)
Such an act
of aggression would almost certainly drive NATO to significantly reinforce its
eastern flank and to consider permanently stationing forces in the Baltic
States, Poland and Romania. (President Biden said Tuesday he was moving more
troops to the Baltics.) And it would generate fierce Ukrainian armed
resistance, with strong support from the West. A bipartisan effort is already
underway to craft a legislative response that would include intensifying lethal
aid to Ukraine. It would be far from a repeat of Russia’s annexation of Crimea
in 2014; it would be a scenario reminiscent of the Soviet Union’s ill-fated
occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
Mr. Biden
and other Western leaders have made this much clear in round after round of
furious diplomacy. But even if the West is somehow able to deter Mr. Putin from
all-out war — which is far from assured right now — it’s important to remember
that his competition of choice is not chess, as some assume, but rather judo.
We can expect him to persist in looking for a chance to increase his leverage
and strike in the future. It will be up to the United States and its friends to
deny him that opportunity by sustaining forceful diplomatic pushback and increasing
economic and military support for Ukraine.
Although
Mr. Putin will, in my experience, never admit to making a mistake, he has shown
that he can be both patient and pragmatic. He also is surely conscious that the
current confrontation has left him even more dependent on China; he knows that
Russia cannot prosper without some ties to the West. “Sure, I like Chinese
food. It’s fun to use chopsticks,” he told me in our first meeting. “But this
is just trivial stuff. It’s not our mentality, which is European. Russia has to
be firmly part of the West.”
Mr. Putin
must know that a second Cold War would not necessarily go well for Russia —
even with its nuclear weapons. Strong U.S. allies can be found on nearly every
continent. Mr. Putin’s friends, meanwhile, include the likes of Bashar
al-Assad, Alexander Lukashenko and Kim Jong-un.
If Mr.
Putin feels backed into a corner, he has only himself to blame. As Mr. Biden
has noted, the United States has no desire to destabilize or deprive Russia of
its legitimate aspirations. That’s why the administration and its allies have
offered to engage in talks with Moscow on an open-ended range of security
issues. But America must insist that Russia act in accordance with
international standards applicable to all nations.
Mr. Putin
and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, like to claim that we now live in a
multipolar world. While that is self-evident, it does not mean that the major
powers have a right to chop the globe into spheres of influence as colonial
empires did centuries ago.
Ukraine is
entitled to its sovereignty, no matter who its neighbors happen to be. In the
modern era, great countries accept that, and so must Mr. Putin. That is the
message undergirding recent Western diplomacy. It defines the difference between
a world governed by the rule of law and one answerable to no rules at all.
Madeleine
Albright (@madeleine) is the author of “Fascism: A Warning” and “Hell and Other
Destinations.” She served as the U.S. secretary of state from 1997 to 2001.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário