With no armed invasion of Ukraine, on a day when the CIA claimed, high risks remain.
Russia has maximized anticipation of a military invasion, as likelihood of this scenario was a hot-button issue on the media landscape. We believe that could work in Russia’s favor, as unconfirmed forecasts will undermine credibility of further warnings about Russia’s threats to Ukraine. In such a way, the Kremlin will seize an opportunity to launch a sudden military invasion of this country, or any other Eastern European or Baltic democracy.
Russia does not withdraw its forces to home bases. With most of them moving, it is difficult, on the one hand, to size up plans by the Russian command, and, on the other hand, it is a possibility for a quick strike. Starting from 2014, Moscow holds regular military exercises for the rapid transfer and far deployment of storm troops. It is no question they practice operational deployment in strategic areas.
Estonia’s Foreign Intelligence Department gets on board with this assessment, claiming that Estonia and other democracies should be ready for constant war threats by Russia. That forecast does not depend on whether Moscow invades Ukraine any time soon or not.
Russian leaders keep following the narratives by Primakov and Karaganov, as they have shaped Moscow’s foreign policy for the last ten years. The Primakov’s narrative says Russia should control the whole territory of former Soviet Union. The Karaganov’s narrative suggests that Russian speakers who do not live in Russia should be used as a core group for Russia’s foreign policy. He enables Moscow to make territorial claims, threatening territorial integrity, as it encourages and cultivates separatism. Military, political and business elites are allowed to be corrupted, the narrative says. At the same time, Russia acts as mediator in fabricated conflicts, as it promotes its influence in the region. The narrative allows to use force to maintain Russia’s leading role in former Soviet Union. Karaganov believes that history studies are the best tool for political analysis. With history revised and arbitrarily rendered, Russia justifies its territorial claims.
Crimea’s annexation and Donbass war are prime examples of Karaganov’s narrative.
From this perspective, Russia will push back against sovereignty and independence of any country that is under the Kremlin’s footprint, with its maximum within the boundaries of Russian Empire, and minimum – those of Soviet Union.
In view of this, Ukraine crisis stems from Moscow’s ambition to set up zones of geopolitical influence in Eastern Europe, with limited sovereignty of ex-Soviet countries and their domestic and foreign policies subordinate to the Kremlin. Moscow believes that will minimize the risk for Russian regime, as its stability depends on controlled chaos in the countries near Russia and crises, triggered if those countries make attempts to run out of Moscow’s control.
We note that was Russia that made Ukraine move towards NATO. Prior to Crimea’s annexation, Kyiv was neutral, with just 35% in favor of NATO membership for Ukraine. That amount reaches 60% today and keeps growing amid escalation. Russia’s security demands, therefore, are just a way to cause additional tension in the region and take Crimea’s return, Donbas, and sanctions off the table. This is a diplomatic deception to use a new crisis to divert attention away from the territories previously occupied by Russia. Such type of blackmail indicates that Russia has no interest in easing tension, with its forces constantly located around Ukraine’s border, as they slightly change their numbers on a rotation system.
Read also: Russia’s fear has a quick ear
Russian security demands, de facto and de jure, require facilitating new military operations in Europe to enlarge Russia’s territory and promote its influence.
That way, Ukraine crisis will be deliberately fuelled by Russia, until Kyiv is finally integrated into the European and Euro-Atlantic geopolitical alliances, and the West destroys Russian claims to zones of influence. In a reverse situation, Russia might launch the scenario of a migration crisis like the Syrian one, that will destabilize Europe.
Sooner or later, geopolitical wants by Russia will affect NATO security in the Baltics and the Balkans. This process is inevitable, as Ukraine’s fall will get the ball rolling.
