VIDEOSGZERO World with Ian BremmerQuick TakePUPPET REGIMEIan ExplainsGZERO ReportsAsk IanGlobal Stage
Site Navigation
Search
Human content,
AI powered search.
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
There’s not an off-ramp in sight, and that’s a problem. More than 60 days into the conflict in Ukraine, Ian Bremmer believes the chances for a negotiated settlement are looking slim.
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take:
Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here, and your Quick Take. And got to talk about Russia-Ukraine.
We are 62 days now into this war and on pretty much every front, we continue to see international relations deteriorate. You kind of hope that there would be some kind of off-rampin terms of a negotiated settlement, in terms of freezing the conflict, but it really doesn't look that way at all. Some of that's good news. Some of that is the Ukrainian government being able to really inspire the advanced industrial democracies around the world to win the information war against the Russians. As a consequence, getting an enormous amount of support and holding off the Russians. Certainly, Zelensky in much stronger position today than he ever was since he's been elected president and his regime is not about to be overthrown.
Leaving that aside, the level of direct conflict and indirect conflict with the Russians is only picking up. And what do I mean by that? Well, first on the economic side, we continue to see a move towards oil embargo being discussed now by the French, after the elections, by the Germans as well. By the end of this year, you kind of expect to see that. You also had the Polish government saying they're going to cut off gas. And after that, the Russians said, "Well, you know what? We're not going to send you any gas starting now." Same with Bulgaria.
The Europeans are unhappy about this, but they've also declared economic war against the Russians. So it's not a surprise to anyone. The only reason there's any gas still going is because the Europeans need it. Otherwise, they would've cut that off too. And so the fact that the Russians are now starting to squeeze the one economic lever they have left against the Europeans, or at least some of them. Particularly, let's be clear, the Poles and the Bulgarians are the East Europeans who have been strongest in their desire to help Ukraine push back the Russians, provide more advanced military capabilities, squeeze the Russians harder economically. So I mean, there's a lot of tit for tat going here, but the point is that this relationship is really being severed and, if anything, that's only speeding up. It's not slowing down.
Then you have the fact that the Finns and the Swedes are now saying that they will go to apply NATO together in May. That will get approved by the end of June at the Madrid summit. Again, a much worse position for the Russians to be in than they would have been before they invaded Ukraine, if they hadn't chosen to invade Ukraine. Sergey Lavrov, the Foreign Minister, very unhappy about all of this and saying that this is becoming dangerous in terms of a potential World War III, potential nuclear escalation.
The Russians have said that now on no fewer than six or eight occasions that I can count over the last couple months. I don't take it at face value, I don't take it literally, but I do take it seriously in the sense that Russia-NATO confrontation is coming. And I think that is true because the Russian economy is going to be permanently in a state of free fall. And that's going to squeeze Putin to a degree. I say it in part because the Europeans are going to be continuing to treat Russia as enemy number one. That includes lots of military capabilities, arrayed at Russia.
And I also believe that because Zelensky himself will be this international hero for the West, running a country that the Russians do not see as legitimate, that Putin doesn't see as legitimate. And the idea that Zelensky is going to be there with maximalist aims against Russia, because they've invaded his country, saying, "Give us more military support, give us more political support, more economic support," and getting it. That's an unacceptable outcome for Putin.
Now I'm not sympathetic to Putin's position at all. I want to be clear about this, not one iota. The Russians are 100% responsible for this invasion that is continuing to go on two plus months in, but I am saying that the Russians' capabilities in terms of destabilizing, not just Ukraine, but also a lot of countries across the transatlantic relationship is real and hasn't yet been experienced or really even tested. And I fear that we are going to be testing that going forward.
Final point on this, I'm someone who didn't really like the idea that the Secretary of Defense of the United States, Lloyd Austin was saying that the goal of the United States is to really hit, to diminish, to degrade Russian military capabilities. I understand that the Americans are happy to have that happen. I understand the moral outrage, but the goal is really to get Ukraine back to the status quo ante, certainly before the invasion on February 24th, ideally before the Russian invasion in 2014.
That is different from saying, "We want to hurt the Russian military so much that they'll never be able to attack Ukraine again." Number one, I think that's unrealistic. Number two, I think that's incredibly dangerous for a country that spends 10x, what Ukrainians spend on defense and have all sorts of military capabilities, not just to hit Ukraine, which they are deploying, but also to hit NATO, which they largely are not deploying, whether it's space weapons or cyber weapons and the rest. And the idea that the Americans are going to try to hit the Russians so hard that they can't do this again, implies that Putin's response will be escalation against NATO.
And if I were advising the Biden administration, and I do talk to them, of course, informally, my view is that public statement is farther than the Americans should actually be going right now. And this is after a couple of months of leading a NATO coalition quite strongly, with the recognition that NATO supports Ukraine, but their interests are not identical to Ukraine. For Ukraine, you want to absolutely get rid of every Russian that you can find. You want to destroy their military capabilities. Of course, Ukraine wants to do that, the United States and NATO, not Ukraine. If they were, if those interests were aligned 100%, Ukraine would've been in NATO in any case. And they're not. They're not going to be.
So that's it for me. Hope everyone's well, better than the Ukrainians, at this point. Talk to you all soon.
For more of Ian Bremmer's weekly analyses, subscribe to his GZERO World newsletter at ianbremmer.bulletin.com
Keep reading...Show less
More from Quick Take
Zelensky, Trump, and NATO: A united front on Ukraine?
August 18, 2025
Trump and Putin to meet in Alaska to discuss Ukraine
August 11, 2025
US government rescinds West Point role for former cyber director
August 04, 2025
US-EU trade deal marks a win for Trump
July 28, 2025
The US, China, and the critical minerals question
July 21, 2025
Epstein conspiracies divide Trump's MAGA base
July 14, 2025
US-Brazil relations in crisis
July 10, 2025
Elon Musk vows to start a new political party
July 07, 2025
What Zohran Mamdani’s win really signals for US politics
June 30, 2025
Iran's retaliation shows strategic weakness
June 23, 2025
US enters war with Iran: What comes next?
June 22, 2025
Iran looks to negotiate ceasefire
June 16, 2025
Elon vs. Trump: Billionaire fallout goes public
June 06, 2025
Elon Musk steps down from Trump administration
May 29, 2025
Trump's weekend of geopolitical success
May 12, 2025
Can Trump and Carney reset US-Canada relations?
May 07, 2025
Trump’s ‘less is more’ message is un-American
May 05, 2025
Ian Bremmer on Trump's first 100 days
April 28, 2025
Trump’s America: A kleptocracy but not a police state
April 23, 2025
Inside the Harvard-Trump showdown
April 21, 2025
Can the US win by undoing globalization?
April 14, 2025
Who benefits from Trump's tariff wall?
April 07, 2025
Trump's tariffs & the end of globalization
April 03, 2025
Leaked Signal chat shows Trump team's mindset
March 26, 2025
What Trump team's war plans leak revealed
March 25, 2025
Is Europe in trouble as the US pulls away?
March 24, 2025
Putin-Trump Ukraine call is a small win for both sides
March 18, 2025
What will Trump offer Putin in Ukraine ceasefire talks?
March 17, 2025
Ukraine ceasefire deal now awaits Putin's response
March 11, 2025
Can Europe broker a Ukraine ceasefire?
March 03, 2025
What Trump-Zelensky fallout means for Ukraine war
March 01, 2025
Why the US-Ukraine minerals deal changed
February 26, 2025
Germany's close election limits its ability to lead Europe
February 24, 2025
Ukraine hopes for Europe's help as US negotiates with Russia
February 18, 2025
JD Vance stuns Munich conference with critique on European democracy
February 14, 2025
Trump-Putin chat over Ukraine "deeply" worries Europe
February 13, 2025
What is Trump's Gaza playbook?
February 10, 2025
Why cutting USAID will hurt American foreign policy
February 05, 2025
Why is Trump starting a trade war with Canada?
February 02, 2025
How Trump's assertive foreign policy impacts international relations
January 27, 2025
Trump's Davos address sets up big shifts in US strategy
January 24, 2025
From Davos: How global leaders are grappling with Trump’s return
January 20, 2025
Ian Bremmer on the forces behind the geopolitical recession
January 17, 2025
What Greenlanders might want from a deal with Trump
January 13, 2025
New Year's Day terror attacks highlight America's divisions
January 03, 2025
GZERO Series
GZERO Daily: our free newsletter about global politics
Keep up with what’s going on around the world - and why it matters.





























































