It's time for Russia to retreat from Ukraine. And make a change at the top.
Kremlin policymakers should be discussing how to engineer a face-saving retreat, or perhaps consider high-level changes in their own government.
Ukraine looks like a tougher nut to crack than many, especially in the Kremlin, expected.
In the lead-up to the invasion, it seemed there was not much hope for Ukraine. Few if any commentators and national security officials gave the embattled country much chance to resist Russia’s military power.
But nearly a week into the conflict, Ukraine still stands. The Ukrainians are fighting back more determinedly than Moscow expected. Scrappy Ukraine army defenders have slowed Russia’s advance on Kyiv. Citizen militia groups have taken up arms to defend their communities. A U.S. Defense official noted that events had unfolded “not quite the way that they (Moscow) had anticipated.”
Opinions in your inbox: Get a digest of our takes on current events every day
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is leading the resistance from the streets of Kyiv. His video messages on social media have helped inspire a determined spirit and sense of pride among the Ukrainians. “I’m here,” he said in one video, shot in downtown Kyiv. “We won't lay down our arms. We will defend our country. ... Glory to Ukraine.”
Vladimir Putin, by contrast, wages the public diplomacy battle looking like a badly lit, petulant boss in a Zoom meeting.
Russian troops might not have been ready to fight the war of conquest that their political bosses in Moscow demanded. In Kryukiv, unarmed Ukrainian civilians confronted and turned back a Russian tank column simply by blocking the road and imploring the Russians to leave. Footage posted to Twitter shows purported Russian POWs saying, “No one wanted to come. But they told us, it’s war time, you’ll be the enemy of people. So we went – demoralized and unwilling.”
Thousands protest in Russia
There are unexpected signs that the Russian people do not back Putin’s war. Anti-war demonstrations have broken out in dozens of Russian cities, and police arrested more than 2,000 protesters on Sunday alone. Images of the protesters, and the police crackdowns, further erode the façade of legitimacy that Moscow has sought to erect to justify its naked aggression against Ukraine.
What will invasion change?: Putin's war against Ukraine might lead to regime change. In Moscow, not Kyiv.
The international community has rallied to oppose Russia’s war through economic sanctions, closing airspace to Russian aircraft and sending weapons to Ukrainian defenders. Russia’s stock market has crashed, and the ruble is plunging to record lows.
Even the International Judo Federation did its part by suspending black belt Putin’s honorary presidency.
It is difficult to understand what Putin wants or expects out of this war. He has argued that Ukraine is not a legitimate country, seemingly making the case for conquest and annexation. But the free world is not accepting this burst of imperialist bravado.
Russian forces are apparently bogged down, and time is working against Moscow. On Sunday, Putin put Russian nuclear forces on alert, which adds an air of unpredictable craziness to assessments of his strategic decision-making. Whatever Putin wants from Ukraine, nuclear conflagration won’t get it.
Facts don't favor the invaders
It is too soon to say Russia is losing the war. Facts on the ground do not favor the invaders, but this could change rapidly. Most of Russian forces in the area have yet to be committed. Moscow is no doubt regrouping after the initial setbacks and will mount a more determined assault in the next phase of the offensive.
Yet Russia’s demand for negotiations is not a move that the winning side makes so soon into a conflict. Ukraine's leaders have agreed to talks because they have nothing to lose. Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba called the mere fact of the meeting "already a victory for Ukraine."
Moscow’s failure to seize Kyiv quickly, the poor morale of Russian troops, growing internal dissent and united free world opposition to the invasion speaks to an ill-conceived and poorly executed war that will have no good outcome for Putin.
Kremlin policymakers should be discussing how to engineer a face-saving retreat – or perhaps consider high-level changes in their own government.
James S. Robbins, a member of Paste BN's Board of Contributors and author of "This Time We Win: Revisiting the Tet Offensive," is academic dean ad interim at the Institute of World Politics in Washington, D.C., and served as a special assistant in the office of the secretary of Defense in the George W. Bush administration. Follow him on Twitter: @James_Robbins