We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin drinks tea
Russian nukes move into NATO’s backyard
Russia made good on its promise to move some of its nuclear arsenal to Belarus, putting Russian-controlled nuclear weapons on NATO’s doorstep.
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said his country is hosting the nuclear weapons in response to Poland’s aggression. Over the last two weeks, Poland’s Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki – who’s positioning himself as the national security candidate ahead of national elections in October – has sent thousands of troops to the border amid rising troop numbers and tensions.
But Russia and Belarus aren’t going to trigger the wrath of NATO lightly, and the transition of weapons, “appears to be largely a signal of strength to the West, rather than a preparation for their use,” says Alex Brideau, Eurasia Group’s Europe Head.
NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg denounced Moscow’s move, but Brideau thinks the response that matters most – to Putin at least – is President Joe Biden’s. “Washington has been cautious in its responses since the February 2022 invasion," Brideau says, noting that “we haven't seen much in terms of concrete US actions to the Russian government's threats about the deployment or use of nuclear weapons.”
Meanwhile, the US Embassy issued a security warning yesterday, urging Americans in Belarus to leave the country immediately. The move appears to be motivated by rising tensions in the region, not the nukes. We will be watching to see whether Russia’s latest move is severe enough to harden Biden’s rhetoric.
How do you think the US should respond? Let us know what you’d do in Biden’s shoes here.
Prigozhin's exit shakes Putin's regime
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here and quite a weekend.
We have just gotten through an unprecedented turn of events challenging President Putin in a way that he has not since he's taken power in that country. Mr. Prigozhin, the head of the Wagner Group, built up directly by President Putin, he is solely responsible for Prigozhin's success and power and wealth, and then essentially declaring war against the Kremlin, moving his forces to within dozens of kilometers of Moscow. And then, at the last moment, "cutting a deal" brokered by Belarus's President Aleksandr Lukashenko. He is today still, to the best of our knowledge, a free man. But for how long? It's hard to imagine that's sustainable.
This is a man who has done a lot of fighting for the Russians on the ground in Ukraine, sending his troops into a meat grinder, as it's been referred to in Bakhmut, some of the only territorial gains that the Russians have had in the last six months. Lionized for that by Russian state media on billboards across the country over the past months, but also increasingly insubordinate, both in his public willingness to go after the Ministry of Defense, the forces, the command structure on the ground, and, in particular, Minister of Defense, Sergei Shoigu. And then, over the last week, when Shoigu said that all Wagner forces and all paramilitary forces had to sign direct contracts with the Ministry of Defense, in other words, they'd be rolling up to their authority. And Prigozhin said no and then Putin directly said, reiterating that order, "Have to sign. Those orders have to become conscripted under contract under Shoigu."
Prigozhin again said no. Put him in an impossible situation. He was essentially dead man walking if he was going to say no. And he said no. Of course, he wasn't in much better of a situation if he said yes, because then those troops no longer report to him, and that is his power base. So he ended up turning around from Ukraine and sending his troops first into Rostov uncontested, head seat of the Southern Military District where the command center for the Ukrainian offensive has been for the Russians. And then up towards Moscow. So that explains why he did it, but much harder to explain why he suddenly backed down and why he's still alive today. Why he backed down I think has more to do with the fact that he didn't have any support inside the Kremlin. I mean, while this was all going on, there were no defections among Russia's military leadership. There were no defections inside the government. There were no defections among Russia's key oligarchs.
Prigozhin is not only a creation of Putin, but is also outside the power structure. So inside the power structure, you don't have a lot of people saying, "I'm with him. I'm with stupid." And so he marches towards Moscow in an utter move of desperation but doesn't have the ability to beat the forces, or doesn't think he does, that are loyal directly to Putin and are accountable directly to Putin defending Moscow. And so then when he is offered a deal, he takes the deal. But I mean, anyone that believes that a deal offered by Putin after this level of personal challenge and embarrassment to the Russian President. People have been assassinated and jailed for a lot less in what they do to the all powerful, or previously all powerful Russian President.
So why is he still alive? And there I think it's a matter of timing. It's the fact that the Russian government has been fighting against this Ukrainian counter offensive, and if they were to have a fight against Wagner right now, and keep in mind the Ukrainian counter offensive hasn't gone very well, but most of the troops aren't involved yet, they have 11 plus trained and equipped divisions, trained by the US, by the UK and allies, only two and a half of them are already involved in the fighting, which means that Putin knew a lot more was coming. And if Wagner's not available, and the Chechen Kadyrov group, another paramilitary that has declared full loyalty to the Ministry of Defense, was pulling back to fight against Wagner and the MOD forces are going to need to be used for that as well.
Suddenly, the Ukrainians might have a clear ability to retake all the territory. So this was the worst possible time for Putin to go to war against Wagner. And perhaps that is the best explanation for why it is that they cut a deal. But the deal that was cut is not a deal that can't be broken. And, of course, now that the Wagner Group, their headquarters have been raided, it has been announced that all of their forces are going to sign direct contracts with the Russian Ministry of Defense. Prigozhin is, at least we believe, either headed to or in Belarus, probably in Belarus. Not a sovereign state. Intelligence, military, really under the control of Russia, just as Lukashenko primarily is. And so that means if Putin wants to take him out, it's more a matter of time than it is a matter of capability.
And I personally can't imagine that he's going to be with us for all that much longer. But a lot of damage has been done. The fact that around the world everyone has seen that when Putin has been challenged and challenged hard that the Russian forces did not stand up to the Wagner forces until they got close to Moscow. And they also showed that, at the last moment, Putin didn't use his forces against him, but instead let him walk away. That's a weakness for Putin internally that is being seen by the Russian people. It's being seen by Russian military elites and others. It's also being seen by other countries around the world.
The Chinese, supposed to be Russia's best friend, they didn't provide any military support for Putin when he was at his moment of greatest need. The Kazakhs, Russia sent over 2,000 paramilitary forces, parachutists, and others into Kazakhstan over a year ago before the Ukraine war was launched, because a coup occurred against President Tokayev. He really appreciated that support. He's there today because of that support. His willingness to support Putin, he said it was an internal Russian matter. So I mean, you look around the world right now, we have a very strong NATO, we have enormous support from NATO into Ukraine, and we have Russia pretty isolated on the global stage.
That's good for the Ukrainians, there's no question, and it's good for NATO's strategy, but it also increasingly gives Putin no outs. Someone considered a war criminal internationally and someone that now has been tested in a way he never expected to be by his own loyal former chef, the caterer, Prigozhin, who at least for now is in Belarus. This story is not close to over. Russia's stability is now a significant question in a way that it really was not just 72 hours ago, and I'm sure we're going to be talking about it quite a bit.
You go back to January this year. Our top risks as we look forward over the course of every year in terms of likelihood, imminence, and impact, number one, and not even close in any other risk that we've seen over the course of the 25 years that we've had Eurasia Group, was the idea of a rogue Russia. A Russia that increasingly has been decoupled from, isolated from, the advanced industrial economies of the world, and is acting out of a sense of risk acceptance and impunity. That rogue Russia risk has gone up significantly over the weekend.
That's it for me. I'll talk to you all real soon.
- Former Russian intelligence officer: Prigozhin's threat to Putin is “ludicrous” ›
- Prigozhin’s meltdown ›
- The man with his own army ›
- Prigozhin marches on Moscow: What we know, and what to watch ›
- What the war in Ukraine looks like inside Russia - GZERO Media ›
- Don't count Yevgeny Prigozhin out - GZERO Media ›
China-US tensions over COVID origins & Russia's war
But a couple of points here. First, this lab-leak concept was one that would get you banned on social media if you came out with it a year ago. And it just goes to show how you can have a dominant narrative that gets picked up politically and suddenly no one's allowed to ask questions anymore. That doesn't make it a conspiracy theory, it means that people are still trying to understand where it is, what's going on. There was so much that was uncertain about this disease in the early days. One of the things that annoyed me about Fauci, who I've interviewed a couple of times myself, gotten to know him a bit, is the fact that he came out feeling like he was so certain in some of his early communications, on things that he obviously wasn't certain about, and ended up undermining and de-legitimizing science and the medical community in the US in a way that we really cannot afford to do so.
Saying you don't know something is okay. I mean, back last May, I published the fact that I had no idea if it came from a lab or if it came from a wet market. What was clear to me is that it was getting politicized. What was clear from the scientific community is that the disease had not been bioengineered, that it was an accident that it came out. What was also clear is the Chinese lied to their own citizens and internationally, about the virus's origins, when they knew that there was human-human transmission. They lied to the WHO, the World Health Organization, and as a consequence, it was much worse for everyone. And they're still not allowing the WHO or others to investigate appropriately the origins. The fact that the country that the virus came from is not willing to be transparent with the global scientific community. I mean, thankfully there were a bunch of doctors and scientists in China that had humanity and said, "We got to get this out no matter what." Or it would've been even worse.
But it's an enormous problem when politics intervenes in what needs to be just a follow-the-science situation. And that's true on climate, it's true on the pandemic, it's true in so many areas of the world. And in that regard, we haven't changed much at all from today through the beginnings of the pandemic. This, of course, is going to make the Americans feel tougher about relations with China. That is also true on the back of China embracing, welcoming Belarus President/Dictator, Alexander Lukashenko, completely illegitimate leader of that country, using all sorts of repression and force against his own domestic opposition. No free press of course. Again, not surprising for the Chinese at all, but one of Russia's key allies, this on the back of Wang Yi visiting Moscow, and what I expect, relatively soon, will be an announcement that Xi Jinping is going to Moscow. There is a greater comfort of these two countries working more closely together.
Does that mean that the Chinese will provide weapons directly for Russia? I don't think so. I think that's indeed why the Americans put the Chinese on notice. They had intelligence that the Chinese were considering sending drones over. The UK, the NATO Secretary General, also making those statements very strongly. The Europeans and the Americans would have a very different reaction if the Chinese decided to go ahead and put those weapons forward. Now diplomatically, what the Chinese have been saying to the Europeans behind closed doors is, "Look, you guys are providing all these weapons. You're escalating. We are showing restraint." Having said that, if you want to call BS on what the Chinese are saying, you say, "Look, a majority of the world's countries recognize, and have recognized for three straight General Assembly resolutions, that this is an illegal invasion that needs to be condemned and ended immediately. The Chinese have decided that they're going to be neutral and abstain. But most of the world's countries, even the Global South, do not agree with China on this.
That's important, because if the Chinese were to provide weapons to the country that actually invaded, illegally, against the will of the General Assembly, the Chinese are putting themselves in the position of supporting a rogue state. And that is not a position China wants to be in. Not a country that needs economic support and integration from all of the world, not just countries they dominate economically. So I believe that the Chinese may have been fooling around with the idea of providing some weapons to Russia, may have been floating that because they wanted more influence with their own 12-point peace deal. But I would be very surprised if they proceed in providing that support. That's a good thing, in the context of US-China news that right now have very few positive headlines that we're talking about.
So that's it for me. Hope everyone's well, I'll talk to you all real soon.
- China's Ukraine gambit ›
- What We’re Watching: China’s budding diplomacy, Biden’s border control, Russia’s big plans ›
- What We’re Watching: Nigerian election results, Italian migrant tragedy, COVID lab leak report ›
- What We're Watching: YouTube snuffs Bolsonaro, Israel probes Pegasus, China rejects COVID inquiry (again) ›
- What We’re Watching: WhatsApp sues India, US to (re)probe COVID origins, mob boss vs Turkish president ›
- Silicon Valley Bank Collapse: Not 2008 all over again - GZERO Media ›
Photo composite of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping
What We’re Watching: China’s budding diplomacy, Biden’s border control, Russia’s big plans
What’s next for Russia & China?
Russia and China broadcast their friendship to the world on Wednesday as the West freaked out about the possibility of Beijing turning to arm Moscow’s troops in Ukraine. After meeting Chinese top diplomat Wang Yi in the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin said that strong Russia-China ties are “important for stabilizing the international situation.” (A tad rich coming from the guy who upended geopolitics by invading Ukraine a year ago.) Putin also confirmed that Xi Jinping would visit Moscow for a summit in the coming months. Wang, for his part, clarified that while their famous partnership “without limits” is not directed against any other nation, it certainly should not be subject to external pressure. He said both countries support “multipolarity and democratization of international relations” – in other words, not a US-led liberal international order. Still, no matter what Western governments say, the Chinese are not so willing to break ties with the US and its allies, mainly because Beijing's trade relations are too important. Meanwhile, we wonder whether the current status of the Russia-China relationship — friends with benefits but complicated — will blossom into a marriage (of convenience) or end in a bad breakup. What we know for sure is that China is getting more involved in the Ukraine conflict generally. Learn more here.
Biden’s tough new move on immigration
The Biden administration this week unveiled a new hardline immigration plan that will likely come into effect after the current pandemic-era immigration policy, known as Title 42, lapses on May 11. It would then stay in place for two years. Under the measure, first revealed last month, asylum-seekers who cross the US southern border illegally or who fail to apply for asylum in the first country they cross through will be banned from applying for asylum in America. This comes after Biden’s team last month introduced a new policy, whereby migrants from Nicaragua, Haiti, Cuba, in addition to Venezuela, would be eligible for “parole” – meaning temporary two-year work visas – only if they apply for asylum from outside the US and if they have a US sponsor. The new plan mirrors a similar policy introduced by former President Donald Trump that was ultimately blocked by the courts. Rights groups, citing a potential threat to humanitarian protections, say they will seek legal action again. Biden has been struggling to contain an uptick in migrants arriving at the southern border in recent months – and the subsequent political backlash. But this plan will infuriate the left flank of the Democratic Party whose support Biden needs as the 2024 presidential race gets underway.
Russia looks beyond Ukraine?
Ukraine is not the only piece of former Soviet ground that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin might like to recapture. Belarus, allied with Russia as part of a “union state” since 1999, has seen Kremlin influence within its borders grow since strongman President Aleksandr Lukashenko called on Putin for help with domestic protests that broke out in response to a rigged 2020 election. Lukashenko has so far resisted pressure from Putin to commit Belarusian troops to the war in Ukraine, but he has allowed Russia to use his country as a staging ground for invasion. This week, a consortium of journalists representing Yahoo News, Germany’s Süddeutsche Zeitung, and other media organizations published a document they say was obtained from inside Putin’s government that details a Russian plan to essentially annex Belarus by 2030. The 17-page report, titled "Strategic Goals of the Russian Federation in Belarus" and completed in the summer of 2021, calls for Russian infiltration of Belarus’ politics, economy, and military. Like Ukraine, Belarus is situated on land that has sometimes been ruled by Moscow, and it serves as a forward buffer against further NATO advance toward Russian borders. It’s also consistent with a Kremlin announcement this week that created uncertainty over Russian recognition of the independence of Moldova, another former Soviet Republic. Moldova’s pro-Western President Maia Sandu and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky recently alleged a Russian plan to organize a coup in Moldova.
Putin aims to draw Belarus into Ukraine war
Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden, shares his perspective on European politics.
What's the mood in the transatlantic relationship?
Well, not bad. Certainly not, but not as good as it should be. There's been or there is a substantial European irritation with a very high level of subsidies that is given to industries in the US, excluding European deliveries of electric vehicles and energy investments and things like that. And that is causing a somewhat of a mini crisis that I hope will be resolved in the next few months. Let's hope for the best.
What is Mr. Putin doing in Minsk, in Belarus these days?
Well, it's fairly obvious that he's trying to press Belarus and Lukashenko in a far more active role in his aggression against Ukraine. He is now looking medium- and long-term at that particular war. He's probably going to make another go for Kyiv when his new army mobilized hundred thousands of people, when his new army is ready, that he needs Belarus on board. That's in all probability, the meaning of his visit to Minsk today.
Podcast: Fighting for democracy in "Europe's last dictatorship"
Listen: Is there a path to democracy for Europe's last dictatorship, Belarus? Exiled Belarusian opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya discusses her hopes and fears for the country with Ian Bremmer on the GZERO World Podcast. President Alexander Lukashenko has maintained a tight grip on power in Belarus for the last 26 years and rigged the results of his last election which led to widespread protest and unrest in his country, though few consequences globally. But will he now be held accountable after diverting a flight between two European capitals to arrest a dissident journalist? And just how close are he and Vladimir Putin?
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or your preferred podcast platform to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.
Life under dictatorship in Belarus
What should you put in your bag before leaving home in Belarus nowadays if you openly criticize the government? Opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya recommends packing an extra pair of pants and socks in case you get kidnapped or thrown in jail because under strongman President Alexander Lukashenko, you "feel that you don't have rights at all."
Her conversation with Ian Bremmer is part of an interview on the upcoming episode of GZERO World, which begins airing on US public television Friday, June 11. Check local listings.
US global reputation a year after George Floyd's murder; EU sanctions against Belarus; Olympics outlook
Ian Bremmer shares his perspective on global politics on World In 60 Seconds (aka Around the World in 180 Seconds) with help from Moose the dog:
On the anniversary of George Floyd's murder, have race relations in the United States tarnished its reputation globally?
Sure it doesn't help. There's no question in the United States is one of the most racially divided and violent countries among advanced industrial democracies. And to the extent that the United States attempts to talk about human rights globally, it has a harder time doing that than other G7 countries would. And the Russians historically, and increasingly the Chinese, are trying to propagandize pretty hard by pointing out American hypocrisy. So I think it matters, but I would still argue that what the United States does internationally probably matters a lot more in terms of the way the US is perceived by those countries. So, no question it's important. And the legacy one year in, so far in the United States in terms of improving race relations, the state of that trajectory does not look great right now.
The EU levied sanctions against Belarus. Now what?
Well, the EU responded collectively and quickly, that we can definitely say, in terms of preventing Belarus' flag carrier from traveling to points in Europe, as well as stopping European airlines from flying through Belarus airspace, that's a good first move. They've said there'll be additional sanctions, let's see what they are. Let's see if they're significant, if they're against Belarusian oil or potash, where they make their real money. Let's see if they really hurt the economy, which would also have knock on effects for Russia, which exports a lot of energy into Belarus, they'd be unhappy about that. So we'll see. For the first 24 hours, I give the EU, the United States, the UK, all pretty strong marks for the way they've responded. But this is an unprecedented act of state criminality on the part of a very illegitimate Lukashenko, who should not be president, was not legitimately elected, and he's not going anywhere anytime soon. I want to see what next sanctions come from the Europeans. I also want to see the Putin meeting in Sochi with Lukashenko next week, very important.
Finally, with the US adding Japan to the, "do not travel list," what's the outlook on the Olympics?
Not great. Over 80% Of Japanese now say that they actually don't want the Olympics to go forward, that's a pretty staggering number. The Japanese prime minister says, "It's not up to me, it's the IOC. And the IOC has the decision. They say it has to go forward." Look, the prime minister has sovereignty, if he wants to cancel it, he can cancel it, though clearly there will be costs for the Japanese government, major economic costs, major political costs for the prime minister either way. It's really staggering to see just how much the Japanese have lagged every other advanced industrial democracy in terms of a vaccine rollout. And, and I still think there's a good chance they do end up canceling this, but it's going right down to the wire. And my heart goes out to everybody involved, the Japanese people, the athletes that have been prepping; this is not the kind of Olympics that you really want to be hosting.