The job of an intelligence officer is to make probabilistic assessments about the intentions of foreign actors. The job of a US foreign policymaker or diplomat is to try to shape those intentions in ways that serve US interests. 1/THREAD.
If the IC assesses that the probability of Putin invading Ukraine is 10%, then the job of Biden, Blinken, Sullivan et al is to reduce that percentage to 5% or 1%. 2/
Those spending so much time arguing about probabilities should spend more time discussing creative ways to influence these probabilities, no matter if you think it's 70% or 10% probability of invasion. 3/
As a long-time observer of Putin (since 1991), and a previous consumer of top-secret US intelligence for 5 years, I'm skeptical of all assessments of his intentions. I don't know what he plans to do. You don't either. He himself has probably not decided himself. 4/ END THREAD.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Michael McFaul

Michael McFaul Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @McFaul

6 Dec
In my 5 years in the US government (2009-2014), NATO expansion to Ukraine was a non-issue in U.S.-Russia relations & U.S.-Ukraine relations. 1/ THREAD
In 2010, Medvedev even attended the NATO summit in Lisbon. He said, "The meeting… was historic in terms of its spirit and atmosphere." (I was there; he was thrilled to be at the meeting.) 2/
While attending Obama, Biden, Clinton, Lavrov, Donilon, etc. meetings with Putin/Medvedev/Lavrov, and listening in on nearly every phone call between Obama and Russians for 5 years, I cannot recall a serious contentious exchange about NATO expansion. 3/
Read 8 tweets
5 Dec
After 30 years of either liberal internationalism or all-out war, American strategists have forgotten the tools of "coercive diplomacy" for dealing with great power adversaries. Everyone should go back and read Alex George. Some recommendations: 1/ THREAD.
The Limits of Coercive Diplomacy: Laos, Cuba, Vietnam (with David K. Hall & William Simmons). Boston: Little Brown, 1971. (Expanded Second Edition, 1994, with William E. Simmon.) 2/
Deterrence in American Foreign Policy: Theory and Practice (with Richard Smoke). New York: Columbia University Press, 1974. 3/
Read 7 tweets
21 Nov
Even at the peak of Reagan's constructive engagement with apartheid South Africa, U.S. officials criticized the regime. (though not nearly enough as I wanted at that time!) THREAD 1/
Reagan's Asst Secy for Africa Chester Crocker said that the US wanted to see "the emergence in South Africa of a society with which the United States can pursue its varied interests in a full and friendly relationship, without constraint, embarrassment or political damage." 2/
"The nature of the South African political system prevents us from having such a relationship now. That goal will remain elusive in the absence of purposeful, evolutionary change toward a nonracial system." 3/
Read 4 tweets
21 Nov
Posting a series of articles that up to a Plan B. (Note a grand strategy cannot be summarized in a "tweet" or a phase expressing a desired objective (that's not a strategy)

How to Contain Putin’s Russia
A Strategy for Countering a Rising Revisionist Power
foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukrai…
Read 5 tweets
15 Nov
Biden & team have framed their policy towards China as one of "Competition," (sometimes adding adjectives like "stiff" or "responsible.") That's a good start, but not enough. 2 more Cs need to be added explicitly -- Containment & Cooperation. THREAD 1/
On some issues, the U.S. should seek to compete with China robustly, including first & foremost regarding our different systems of governments. We should want to prove that democracy is a horrible system of government but better than the rest, including PRC autocracy. 2/
And democracy is not only a morally superior system, but also produces better social & economic outcomes. That's why bipartisan infrastructure law & Build Back Better will be the most important policy tools for competing with China initiated in several decades. 3/
Read 20 tweets
21 Oct
Are we entering a new Cold War with China (and Russia)? Yes and no. Can we learn from the Cold War to develop smart strategies to contain & engage China & Russia? Yes & no. Is it complicated? Yes! THREAD 1/.
" The Cold War analogy distorts, more than illuminates, dynamics in US-China relations today." 2/
Advocates for a new Cold War w/ China also underplay the costs & mistakes of the actual Cold War—a tragic era that resulted in millions of deaths, including tens of thousands of Americans, support for autocracies in both the East and West & billions of dollars spent inefficiently
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(