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 }}
US intel leak shows rising risk of NATO-Russia conflict
Are China's Taiwan war games losing their intimidation power?
No, I wouldn't say that. I would say that the response to a President Tsai meeting with Kevin McCarthy in California where no real news was made as opposed to a trip to Taipei is not as provocative, and so, therefore, China's response is not as provocative, and that was true both militarily, diplomatically, and economically in terms of very limited sanctions. And I think they're hitting the Reagan Library and the Hudson Institute, not a big deal. In other words, not meant to overly escalate, and I think that's good news on both sides, and what's otherwise not a very functional relationship politically right now.
What is the fallout from the Pentagon Intelligence leak?
Well, there's clearly going to be a level of concern on the Ukrainians that they're not as robust militarily, and that there's not as much support for what they can accomplish in their counter offensive as people might think. That's problematic because they'll put more pressure on them to engage diplomatically with the Russians earlier than perhaps they would like, or then Zelensky would be politically prepared to. The thing that I took away from this leak that was most concerning is how close a UK spy plane was to being shot down by the Russians in the Black Sea. Again, we have to understand that this is an environment where Russia is treated as a rogue state run by a war criminal by the United States and by all of NATO. That's a very dangerous place to be. This is a nuclear power with lots of massive military capabilities fighting an active war. And the West isn't in a direct war with them, but they're doing the intel. They're training the troops. They're providing the weapons, and there's lots of ways this could go very, very badly. We need to recognize that we are closer to that kind of a problem than we might otherwise think.
The Good Friday Agreements turned 25 this week. Is Brexit making it harder to achieve peace in Northern Ireland?
Well, I think it was when Brexit was first put into place and because people like Boris Johnson were playing politics around whether or not there would be a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland. That has largely been resolved by Rishi Sunak with the EU. And clearly, an enormous amount has been accomplished over the last 25 years. Living in Ireland and Northern Ireland is nothing like it was during the so-called Time of Troubles. And that's a good thing, and I'm glad that we can celebrate that anniversary as opposed to, for example, the anniversary of the war in Iraq, which was devastating for pretty much everyone involved.
- What We’re Watching: Suspected US intel leaks, peace talks for Yemen, Lula talks trade with Xi ›
- 25 years later, is Brexit unraveling Northern Ireland’s delicate peace? ›
- The Graphic Truth: As US arms Taiwan, China arms itself ›
- Viewpoint: As an angry China looms, Taiwan’s president seeks support in the Americas ›
- US intel leak could cause problems in Putin's Russia - GZERO Media ›
- Parsing Donald Trump's indictment - GZERO Media ›
- Russia vs. NATO: Heightened risk of war - GZERO Media ›
Russia-NATO confrontation is coming: Putin will escalate
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
No progress after US/NATO-Russia talks, Boris Johnson in trouble
First question, how is the crisis in this part of Europe developing?
Not good. There's been a week of intense diplomacy with talks in Geneva, and Brussels, and Vienna that produced virtually nothing. The Russian, sort of key demands are outrageously unrealistic. They know that is the case. The US is trying to engage them on somewhat different issues. We'll see if there's any prospect there, but it doesn't look too good. I think the likelihood is that we gradually will move into the phase of what the Russians call military technical measures, whatever that is.
Second question, is it really bad for Boris Johnson in the UK at the moment?
Yeah, it is really bad. I mean the latest revelation of sort of "bring your own booze" party at Downing Street during the heavy lockdown period has clearly dented his reputation. Primarily it's hurting the Conservative Party further. I still think he will be there to fight another day. But what remains to be seen is if he's going to be there at the end of the year.
- Can Boris Johnson survive? - GZERO Media ›
- Boris Johnson losing support of UK citizens and his own party ... ›
- Can talks between Russia and the West prevent war in Ukraine ... ›
- Should NATO embrace Ukraine? - GZERO Media ›
- Russia-Ukraine: Don’t expect full-on invasion, but Putin isn’t bluffing - GZERO Media ›