Share this page!

Alexander S. Vindman Profile picture
Twitter logo
Feb 22 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
Russia has invaded Ukraine. The U.S. must respond with significant sanctions to punish Putin’s aggression and deter further invasion. Failure to do so invites further aggression.

Decades of inaction resulted in ever increasing belligerence towards the West.
It’s nonsense to say, “well the Russians have been in L/DNR for 8 years, so nothing new, nothing has changed.” The status quo theory doesn’t hold up. Formerly, Russia waged a covert war. As of today, Russia’s involvement is overt, provocative, & probing for West vulnerabilities.
This open invasion demands a direct and forceful response commensurate with the serious violation of international law.
Also, you can’t on the one hand claim an attack is imminent & that Putin has made a decision & on the other hand claim that proactive sanctions will precipitate hostilities. Just doesn’t make sense. #action≠reaction

• • •

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

Keep Current with Alexander S. Vindman

Alexander S. Vindman 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 @AVindman

Alexander S. Vindman Profile picture
Feb 24
So, just listened to #Tuckyorose @TuckerCarlson. I’ll explain it, since you have no clue. There are several reasons why the U.S. now faces the prospect of a major war in Europe, initiated by your idol, Putin.
For more than two decades Putin has been trending authoritarian. He destroyed Russia’s fledgling democracy and sown chaos in his neighborhood to reestablish Russian power. For Putin, this is a zero-sum game. Putin wins if his opponents loose. Russia views the U.S. an enemy.
His increasing belligerence & efforts to upend the international order—an order that enabled decades of US prosperity—have largely gone unchallenged. The West looked the other way on hopes of cooperation with Russia. That’s misplaced because our interests & values never aligned.
Read 8 tweets
Alexander S. Vindman Profile picture
Feb 21
Putin’s actions put the crisis past the point of a diplomatic resolution. Putin has eliminated the last realistic off-ramp for the crisis. He signed away the possibility of achieving his political aim, a veto over Ukraine’s geopolitical orientation, w/o a military offensive.
Only real bad diplomatic options remain. One of the major parties must now capitulate to avoid military hostilities.

The West would need to abstain from responding to todays major attack on the international system and conced to Russia a veto over European security…
Ukraine has no diplomatic path, with Russia, as the Minsk format is dead.

Russia would need to recognize Ukraine as a Sovereign state (Putin mocked the very idea) & return 190k troops to there bases, w/o achieving his main objectives, & while facing the risk of major sanctions.
Read 4 tweets
Alexander S. Vindman Profile picture
Feb 18
This is standard fare for Russian strategic signaling. It’s part & parcel of Reflexive Control doctrine. Planned set of inputs, nuclear exercises, alerts, civil defense drill to force U.S. leaders to primal decision-making… i.e. self-deterrence. Scary… it almost always works!
In this case, there is no runway for further self deterrence. The U.S. has already clearly expressed no appetite and zero willingness for risk for a bilateral confrontation with Russia and a readiness to defend NATO art. V.
That’s why @POTUS said both “no boots in Ukraine” and also positioned U.S. forces to secure NATO.
Read 4 tweets
Alexander S. Vindman Profile picture
Feb 15
I stand with @Renew_Democracy Fellow @EnesFreedom! I know something about risking your career to do the right thing and that's what Enes did. He spoke out in defense of Uyghurs, Tibetans, and others who don't have a voice. Even if we don't know exactly why he was waived, 1/5
it fits a pattern of the @NBA kowtowing to China's dictatorship. They brought the hammer down on the @HoustonRockets GM after he expressed support for Hong Kong protests. They've bent over backwards to appease the CCP, and this sets a dangerous precedent. 2/5
We used to believe that open societies would export freedom & democratic values, such appeasement shows that we've begun importing authoritarianism. Unfortunately, the @NBA isn't alone. @Disney thanked CCP-aligned groups in Xinjiang who are committing genocide against Uyghurs 3/5
Read 5 tweets
Alexander S. Vindman Profile picture
Feb 9
I appreciate the sentiment @SenSanders, but can’t overlook the contradictions. “We must do everything possible to avoid an enormously destructive war in Ukraine” necessitates using hard power (all means) to attempt to deter a devastating war. theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
Your rejection of hard power is also inconsistent with your call to accept geopolitical realities, i.e. “spheres of influence.”

And, casting aside self-determination is in deep contradictions with progressive beliefs.
A rejection of Ukraine’s NATO membership (not even a possibility for years) doesn’t end this crisis. Putin wants Ukraine. Putin will force the issue, even if the U.S. rejects progressive principles such as the “Open Door” policy.
Read 5 tweets
Alexander S. Vindman Profile picture
Jan 21
US, NATO & Russia have not moved closer to a diplomatic solution. This Russian military buildup is unprecedented and even includes Belarus. A massive offensive is coming. How could this play out?
Read my full take w/ @DomCruzBus:
foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukrai…
1/
There are many possible scenarios. Something short of an offensive might include recognition or annexation of the occupied Donbas. In a limited operation, Russia could seize more of the Donbas & major cities like Mariupol or Odessa, and establish a “land bridge” to Crimea. 2/
But these options would be unlikely to force diplomatic capitulation. They would entail costly urban warfare & long-term occupation of Ukr w/ insurgency. The Kremlin wouldn’t regain influence or control over Ukr domestic & foreign policy, and Ukr wouldn’t become a failed state.3/
Read 10 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @AVindman has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @AVindman!

Read all threads by @AVindman

:(