I remain skeptical that conditions are ripe for a deal. If Trump threatens to cut aid to Ukraine, Putin will be emboldened to keep fighting, not stop his invasion. But dont believe me. Read
John Mearsheimer. 1/ THREAD Mearsheimer wrote in The Tragedy of Great Power Politics,

"appeasement contradicts the dictates of offensive realism and, therefore, is a fanciful and dangerous strategy. It is unlikely to transform a dangerous force into a kinder, gentler opponent, much less a peace-loving state. Indeed, appeasement is likely to whet, not shrink, an aggressor’s appetite for conquest. … " 2/

"Skeptics argue that Putin will never accept Ukraine’s joining NATO. But Ukraine and NATO members do not need to ask for Putin’s permission. Putin has no place in negotiations between Ukraine and the alliance. Allowing him to disrupt or put off these deliberations would be a sign of American weakness not only to Moscow but also to Beijing." 1/ THREAD "These skeptics also grossly overestimate Putin’s concern about Ukraine’s joining NATO. Putin did not invade Ukraine in 2022 to stop NATO’s expansion. In the run-up to 2022, NATO membership for Ukraine was a distant dream, and everyone in Brussels, Kyiv, Moscow, and Washington knew it." 2/

"Given his past skepticism about aid to Ukraine and NATO more generally, it will not be easy to persuade him to take this path. Such a deal, however, supports several of Trump’s objectives." THREAD 1/ By bringing Ukraine into NATO, Trump could achieve a significant victory for one of his foreign policy priorities: burden-sharing. After joining NATO, Ukraine’s armed forces would overnight become the best and most experienced European army in the alliance. Ukrainian soldiers could be deployed to other frontline states, allowing Washington to reduce its own troop commitments." 2/"

Before he leaves office, "President Biden must transfer all assets of the Russian Central Bank currently held in American banks to the government of Ukraine or an international foundation committed to Ukrainian reconstruction." 1/ THREAD "These funds amount to some $300 billion, of which the most significant share has been seized by the Europeans. These funds should be transferred as soon as possible to help finance the Ukrainian government and reconstruction." 2/

Let's all stop repeating Putin's bs line about the "threat of Ukraine joining NATO" as the reason he was compelled to invade. Its complete hogwash. There is no data to support this hypothesis. THREAD 1/ I was in the Obama administration for the first 5 years. We had NO plans to expand NATO to Ukraine. Maybe we should have had a plan. But we did not. That is a fact. In 2010, Yanukovich was elected president & had no interest in pursuing a NATO invite. That is a fact too. 2/

I'm watching with elation the fall of Assad and his barbaric regime.

But also remembering in sorrow the many Syrians who needlessly lost their lives over the last decade because Putin, Iran, and Hezbollah propped up these killers, and we failed to stop them. 1/ THREAD In my last book, From Cold War to Hot Peace, the longest chapter is called "Chasing Russians, Failing Syrians." In that chapter, I documented how we in the West tried but failed to get Putin to work with us to bring an end to the Syrian civil war. /2

Many compare Trump to Putin. I have, too. But the moment right now feels more like the Yeltsin era, when Russia's oligarchs took advantage of an older & somewhat incapacitated leader to privatize the state for their own interests. I wrote about this at length in the 1990s. THREAD 1/ See for instance, McFaul, “Russia's ‘Privatized’ State as an Impediment to Democratic Consolidation,” Part I, Security Dialogue, Vol. 29, No. 2 (Spring 1998), pp. 25-33. 2/

I hope future members of Trump's national security team are students of John Mearsheimer, especially when dealing with Putin. THREAD 1/ In his classic The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Professor Mearsheimer wrote (p. 164),
"appeasement contradicts the dictates of offensive realism and, therefore, is a fanciful and dangerous strategy." 2/

"A second Trump presidency will usher in a new chaotic, uncertain, and violent era, both at home and abroad. Some believe that’s ok, that we need an era of disruption to radically undermine the status quo at home and abroad. I don’t." 1/ THREAD "As an academic, I have studied revolutions for over four decades. Some generate better outcomes for societies that live through them. Most do not. Instead, they produce sharp economic downturns, civil wars, dictatorships, and interstate conflicts." 2/

"In the upcoming U.S. presidential election, there are legitimate policy differences between Vice President Kamala Harris and Mr. Donald Trump, over which reasonable people will debate and disagree." THREAD 1/ "For instance, the two candidates have different views on taxation. I can understand why affluent voters might support Trump over Harris. That’s rational, even if I disagree with them." 2/

"Former President Trump ... blamed the United States for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and called Zelenskyy “the greatest salesman in history” because “every time he comes to the country, he walks away with 100 billion.” THREAD 1/ "While Trump rightly talked about the tremendous loss of life and property in Ukraine as a result of war, he never once blamed Putin for such killing and destruction." 2/

The differences between candidates regarding foreign policy in this presidential election are very clear. That is not always the case. But this time around, voters have a very clear choice. Harris and Trump have very different approaches. 1/ THREAD Harris believes in engagement and world leadership, supports allies and multilateralism, champions economic statecraft that benefits all Americans, and aspires to advance our democratic values. 2/

Any American president must take seriously a threat of escalation from Putin (or Xi). No president wants to take actions that would trigger a direct war with Russia or a nuclear attack on Ukraine. But leaders must weigh the costs of action against the costs of inaction. THREAD 1/ Putin and other leaders have stated clearly the conditions under which they would use a nuclear weapon — an existential threat to Russia. Despite all the recent new rhetoric about escalation, has that position changed? I haven’t seen the evidence, but maybe I’ve missed something. (Send links to correct me if I’m wrong). 2/

Good debates show clearly the differences between candidates. In this election there are crystal clear differences between Harris and Trump on foreign policy. I hope the moderators use their time wisely to help voters understand these differences. Thread 1/ On Russia/Ukraine, Trump admires Putin. Harris does not. Harris had pledged to continue to aid Ukraine. Trump has not. 2/

Harris and Trump have some big differences on foreign policy:

"On the big philosophical issue of the purpose of American power, Harris positioned herself squarely in the established American tradition of seeking to advance both American interests and values." THREAD 1/ "She stated bluntly [in her acceptance speech], “As President, I will never waver in defense of America’s security and ideals. Because, in the enduring struggle between democracy and tyranny, I know where I stand—and where the United States of America belongs.” 2/

"On the big philosophical issue of the purpose of American power, @KamalaHarris positioned herself squarely in the established American tradition of seeking to advance both American interests and values [in her speech on Thursday night]." THREAD 1/ She stated bluntly, “As President, I will never waver in defense of America’s security and ideals. Because, in the enduring struggle between democracy and tyranny, I know where I stand—and where the United States of America belongs.” 2/

Im not an expert on domestic issues, but on foreign policy, the policy contrasts between Harras and Trump could not be clearer. THREAD 1/ Harris believes in alliances. Trump does not. 2/

In some presidential elections, the differences between Democratic and Republican candidates are nuanced. In other elections, the big differences in foreign policy were within parties, not between parties (think about the debate about the war in Iraq in the Democratic Party in 2008). THREAD 1/ In the 2024 presidential elections, however, the main foreign policy differences are between @KamalaHarris and Trump and those differences are stark. 1/

In the past, foreign policy debates have often been within parties, not between them. (Think about the debate within the Democratic Party on the Iraq war in 2008). In this election, however, the divides are clearly between the parties, between Harris & Trump. THREAD 1/ First, Harris is an internationalist.

Trump is an isolationist. 2/

In writing about successful breakthroughs in Serbia in 2000, Georgia in 2003, and Ukraine in 2004 a long time ago, I identified 7 conditions for success. 6 are now present in #Venezuela. 1/ THREAD Here is the list of necessary conditions:

1) a semi-autocratic rather than fully autocratic regime; 2) an unpopular incumbent;
3) a united and organized opposition;
4) an ability quickly to drive home the point that voting results were falsified, 2/

The situation in Venezuela right now reminds me a lot of the presidential election days in Serbia in 2000 and Ukraine in 2004, with one big exception--Gonzalez's lead in the exit poll is much higher than these two previous cases of democratic breakthrough. 1/ THREAD I am keeping an open mind. If somehow credible data appear that Maduro won, I will acknowledge his victory. But right now, that seems highly improbable. 2/