Thread by @scharap

Thanks to @IlvesToomas and David Kramer for taking the time to respond to my @POLITICOMag piece. A thread. #Ukraine #Russia 1/13
politico.com/news/magazine/…

Here's their reply. 2/13 politico.com/news/magazine/…

it's important to note two analytical disagreements. 1) They say Putin could be bluffing. No one knows for sure, but given the gravity of the military build-up and the USG concern about Russian plans, I think we should assume he's not bluffing. 3/13

Otherwise, we're effectively betting Ukraine's security on that judgement. 4/13

2) They argue that the West can devise and implement deterrent threats and compellent actions that will force Putin to back down without making any concessions. 5/13

Again, no one knows for sure if such a coercive package could be agreed among the US and the EU or, if so, whether it would work. I have strong doubts, particularly re: the latter, based on Russia's willingness to absorb significant costs to pursue its objectives in Ukraine. 6/13

Anyway, if I agreed with their analysis, I would agree with their recommendations -- at least most of them (see below). who wouldn't want to avert the war and avoid painful concessions, after all? 7/13

But I disagree with their analysis. #Putin seems prepared to act. And I don't think we'll be able to coerce our way out of this. more importantly, the consequences for Ukraine (and the West) are too significant to justify the risk. 8/13

A few more small points. They decry "the dreadful and discredited Minsk agreement." It might be dreadful and discredited, but it's all we have. 9/13

At several points in the article we see statements like "Pushback and strength are the only things Putin understands and respects." This trope overly simplifies a much more complex reality. 10/13

They suggest NATO should deploy forces to Ukraine to deter Russia. Fortunately, the probability of that is close to nil, but it is an extraordinary argument. The credibility of NATO's Article V rests on the distinction between members and nonmembers. Why undermine that? 11/13

Finally, the idea that conditioning Russian withdrawal on an offer of a US-Russia summit strikes me as fanciful. "No withdrawal, no meeting," they write. I think Putin knows that he isn't going to get a summit if he invades. I can't imagine this threat having an effect. 12/13

I hope this thread demonstrates that people can disagree respectfully without hurling insults or questioning motives. 13/13 END