I completed my doctoral thesis at Oxford last year on Russia's military interventions in Ukraine and Syria.
Based on that research, I am sharing some thoughts on why Russia invaded Ukraine and what Putin might do next /1
Russian military interventions are often explained by geopolitical opportunism or regime insecurity
It is intriguing that Russia would invade Ukraine when its great power status was rising and there was no immediate threat to Putin's regime /2
Geopolitical opportunism has been chronically overplayed. Russia's annexation of Crimea and Black Sea foothold was not rationally worth the cost of Western sanctions.
Even in Syria, Russia embarked on a potentially high-risk, uncertain reward mission that ended up succeeding /3
Regime insecurity has also been exaggerated as a driver of Russian aggression.
The 2011-12 protests might have influenced Russian alarmism about Euro-Maidan and the Arab Spring, but there was no serious threat of unrest diffusing from Kyiv and Cairo to Moscow /4
Putin has instead used military interventions as a tool of legacy-building and identity construction. He is focused on the long-term legitimacy of his regime and Russia's political system
Hence, he is willing to take excessive short-term risks and incur geopolitical costs /5
Putin's legacy hinges on satisfying domestic great power status aspirations
This means having a sphere of influence, effectively challenging the US-led legal order, and having a superpower-style global reach
The image of greatness matters even if Russia is actually isolated /6
Putin has also deftly framed his military interventions as a triumph against long-standing perceived internal threats
Fascism, uncontrolled unrest, Western expansionism, Islamic extremism- these narratives date back to Hungary 1956, and endured through the Soviet collapse /7
Putin has also effectively rationalized the costs of military interventions to the Russian people
Highlighting Russia's capacity for self-sacrifice as a contrast to perceived Western decadence is crucial. Hence the continuous World War II Great Patriotic War references /8
The war in Ukraine allows Putin to showcase Moscow's control over its sphere of influence, willingness to combat socially accepted threats and feeds into popular conceptions of "Russian strength"
It is an identity construction and authoritarian consolidation project /9
There are two differences between Russia's current and past actions:
The first is the extent of Russia's willingness to take risks in support of these goals
The second is Putin's reading of public opinion- he is appealing to a core base rather than the public writ large /10
Putin's conduct suggests that he will continue the war in Ukraine until he achieves a success that he frame as a legacy or identity construction win
Given his framing of the war, that likely means he will continue pursuing regime change, but not necessarily an occupation /11
Given this calculus, sanctions are unlikely to deter Putin, and diplomacy is unlikely to change his mind
Only an intra-elite schism, which poses an immediate threat to his regime, might cause him to recalibrate, and even then, most likely only temporarily /12
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Russia is increasingly concerned by the threat of Chinese espionage
Here's some more context on this trend /THREAD
This trend has got three key dynamics
The first is age-old mistrusts bubbling to the surface, concerns that Russia's military vulnerabilities in Ukraine are being studied by China so it can assert influence over the Far East /1
The second is concern about strategic overdependence on China
Russian intellectuals especially at HSE framed China as the Ukraine War's winner in 2022. There is a divide between the pro-China siloviki and more Sino-sceptic RDIF and business community /2
Ukraine's seismic attack on Russia's strategic bomber arsenal is still causing ripples
Here are some thoughts on its implications /THREAD
Ukraine has a stronger case for the expansion of permissions to use NATO class weaponry inside Russia
Ukraine can argue that these attacks have limited escalation risk potential and can enhance strategic stability by weakening Russia's nuclear deterrent /1
Expect Ukraine to push for the harmonization of F-16 use inside Russian territory and the removal of residual range restrictions on ATACMs, Storm Shadows, SCALPs that exist by decree or informally
Friedrich Merz's proposal seemed daring but now its got much more teeth /2
Russian Telegram channels are presenting a wide range of narratives about Ukraine's drone attack
Here are some of the key narratives to watch /THREAD
The key narrative is that Ukraine did this before Istanbul to sabotage the peace talks
Basically, it is aimed at provoking Putin into a harsh response and Ukraine rallying the US to firmly support the anti-Russian agenda /1
This argument is being paired with uncharacteristic calls for restraint even from hardline ultranationalists
Sergey Markov for instance is warning against tactical nuclear weapons use, as destroying Russian populations in Kyiv, Kharkiv and Odesa would benefit Zelensky /2
Russia's security threat to the Baltic States remains an issue of critical importance
Based on my recent engagements with Baltic officials, here are some key findings /THREAD
The overarching mood in the Baltic States is one of vindication
Due to Russia's efforts to reverse their sovereignty from the 1990s and early acts of aggression (2007 cyberattack on Estonia), the Baltic States issued dire warnings to the West about Russian expansionism /1
These warnings were often ignored by Western countries at their peril and the West only really began to see the light about Putin's Russia with the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine
This historical mistake shapes the Baltic States's thinking about European security /2
The US is planning a sweeping overhaul of its Africa policy
Here's the significance of Trump's plans for the geopolitical balance in Africa /THREAD
The impending destruction of the Bureau of African Affairs represents a throwback to pre-decolonization
The bureau was created in 1958 as Eisenhower transcended his skepticism of national liberation leaders in Africa to assert US Cold War strategy there /1
The Trump administration's focus appears to be on resource extraction (especially rare earth deals with countries like DRC) and counterterrorism
A reliance on hard power and economic coercion with little emphasis on diplomacy or soft power /2
Here's what we know about Chinese forces and why they differ from North Korea's role in the Ukraine War /THREAD
As of now, estimates suggest that there is a small contingent of Chinese forces in Ukraine
Two have been captured and estimates from Zelensky run at over 150. This resembles other small brigades of foreign fighters (Yemeni Houthis, Cubans, African forces) /1
China has decried "irresponsible comments" about its personnel being in Ukraine
Zelensky has clearly described this as an escalation of the war from Russia