Illarionov: "Putin's aim is Kiev and all the Ukraine"

Andrei Illarionov has launched in 2002 when Vladimir Putin's economic adviser Russia in the G8. In the "Press" interview, he explains why sanctions come too late now.

The Press: Had in 2002 meant the accession of Russia to the G8 that it would come to the brink of war with Ukraine within a few years?

This is the result of the transformation of Russia from semi-free country it was in 2002, in the full autocracy of today. The political regime is now authoritarian through and through. Still, it is not totalitarian - but close. Russia today is a very different country than in 2002: a country with political prisoners, with the intimidation of minorities, political opponents, homosexuals and many others. His foreign policy is very aggressive. Russia has taken a revisionist, revanchist attitude, whose goal is to redraw borders in Europe. This is no joke, but official government policy.

I have already advocated in 2006 to exclude Russia from the G8. The founding documents of the G8 make it very clear that only the rule of law, democratic states may be members with separation of powers. Since 2004, Russia is not even half democratically, but completely authoritarian. And since the illegal invasion of Georgia in 2008, it has forfeited also from an international perspective, the right to membership of the G8.

Not any more. In 2006, that would at least have had a limited impact on his behavior. Today, it is irrelevant.

Was Stalin's attitude influenced when the Soviet Union in 1939 was excluded after the attack on Finland from the League of Nations? No. It was too late. His regime had already changed into something that was completely different from the conventional understanding of the majority of the international community. Therefore, it would now not even affect Putin's behavior when one excludes Russia from the UN.

As you may recall, there was at that time a statement from the seven other countries that had no legal or other consequences. Three months later, President Sarkozy invited Putin to Cannes and Nice, to have fun. You ask why? You could also ask Messrs Daladier and Chamberlain why they have taken no action against 1938 Hitler and Mussolini. At that time it was called "appeasement", now they say "fresh start".

The is relatively unimportant compared to other more serious consequences. Because that is not the Crimean crisis. This is not Ukraine crisis. It is a crisis that has the potential to lead to a full war. What was I warn for three months, is now official Russian government policy. The connection of the Crimea is practically completed. He will be approved no later than March 21 of the Duma and the Russian Federation. In addition, the attack on Kiev is self directed. Putin's aim is Kiev and all Ukraine. He now wants to build a land corridor from the Crimea to Transnistria, where for some time prevail former KGB or FSB officers. The purpose of this is to cut the Ukraine the Black Sea. And because neither President Obama nor the Europeans are willing to take real action, however, it is only a matter of time before this is achieved.

What has stopped in 2008 Russia's invasion of Georgia? The decision by President Bush to move U.S. Air Force units in Turkey and Romania and warships to send the Black Sea. Once the Russian secret services discovered massive U.S. troop movements in the direction of Georgia, Medvedev and Putin ordered the stop 60 miles outside of Tbilisi. No one wants to do something today. I myself do not want that. But I see no other way to end the aggression and occupation and to prevent this crisis will lead to a pan-European crisis with the neighboring countries, the NATO countries and the United States guaranteed participation

Would financial sanctions against representatives of the Russian government help?

It would be too little and too late. Putin has planned the attack on the Ukraine for a year and already some time ago started to withdraw its assets and those of his supporters from the West.

Andrei Illarionov from 2000 to 2005 was the main economic advisor to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Illarionov brought the membership of Russia in the G8, was responsible for the repayment of Russia's foreign debt and created a stabilization fund to balance fluctuating oil prices. After the violent ending of the hostage crisis at a school in the town of Beslan, in which at least 331 people died, Illarionov resigned in protest. Today he is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington.

So what happens to western Ukraine?

Some observers have also said that the split was based on age as well as geography.

Younger Ukrainians (so the theory goes) who came of age after independence, tend not to identify with Russia.

What happens to them if Putin takes over?

bombing campaign in support of rebels and butchers

Nothing happened in Syria, ironically, thanks to Putin. Serbia and Libya indeed were extremely ill-advised, but in both cases there was an armed conflict going on before we got involved. In the case of Ukraine Putin simply wants to redraw national borders that RF itself had guaranteed, because he feels like it. Also, it is not just a military operation like, for example, the war in Osetia was. It is a complete realignment of RF into a Sovietized political system: the parliament voting to support the leader 100%, celebrities writing chauvinistic open letters, people with dissident opinions fired from their jobs, government overseers are installed at the news organizations; the whole nation is in a Cold War hysteria. The progress toward pluralism and rule of law in RF of the past 20 years has been reversed and if Putin and his circle remain in power for another year or so, we'll have the transition to USSR 2.0 complete.

Ukraine is far too important for Russia to concede to the West.

Once the mentality of the Cold War returns to RF, yes, it becomes strategic thinking and the creation of buffer zones all over again. Problem is, the Ukrainian nation has been borne and will not go down easily. It is the sovietization of RF that pushed Ukraine out of the Russian sphere of influence.

Will Putin go all the way into Ukraine, I don't know. The author seems to agree with you that he will. My earlier prediction was that Putin will chicken out, or someone out there will shoot him.

what happens to western Ukraine?

If RF overruns the Ukrainian military and occupies the entire Ukraine, there will be, most likely, a terrorist activity that would make Chechnya look like a garden party. Putin cannot put the entire Ukraine in a GULAG, even though he will try.

Observe that it is not 1945-54 when Stalin exterminated the Bandera rebels. NATO will quickly toughen up because it is an existential threat to them; they will set up a full blockade. The Russian economy is not going to hold together in order to sustain a prolonged guerrilla war while under sanctions.

Even an annexation of Eastern Ukraine is not going to be easy, given the passions that have been stirred.

I hear what you're saying and see your POV, I just don't see the sense in the West pretending it's so much different than a lot of what the West has done. Did we go into Iraq and kick the bastards out then turn it over to Iran or did we change the alignment of that country? To me, once you start tossing explosives around whether it's for alignment or in support of freedom is just a lot of word games. You commit your forces to support an outcome that's advantageous to your own goals. Call it what you like.

"The progress toward pluralism and rule of law in RF of the past 20 years has been reversed . . ."

I'll tell my pal Ivan that and he'll get a real laugh. Hey, I have Russian friends who have moved here and have family still in Russia. They'd go back and forth a good bit and I'm sure would like to know where they should have been looking for the past few decades to see that pluralism and rule of law. According to them things are better the last five or six years than ever because there are fewer people above the law than there were before Putin was in charge.

My son has been dating a Ukrainian girl and she and her family think the crowd we're now championing are just bought and paid for stooges of the EU. They didn't like the guy that fled, either. The main thing for them is that they don't like or want in power anyone that has Russian parents or grandparents.

Talking with them, I have a feeling there's a "pure Ukrainian" vs "Russian Ukrainian" clash or civil war brewing and being prepared for within the Ukraine. If so, I'm sure both the West and Putin know all about it being inevitable.

In that case, Putin just moved to protect the Crimea before the EU moves to protect the gas pipelines which gives him a major edge when the peace talks start. The West won't have the Crimea to use as a carrot on a stick when the borders are drawn.

Like I say, JMHO and thinking on various angles. I just sure don't see the much difference between a few things the US and EU have done in the past few decades and what Putin is doing now.

Regards

The progress in Russia was in the distance passed from the mentality that was the USSR. Chiefly that was in the freedom of speech, honesty about history, ability to travel, economic opportunity, howbeit meager. That post-soviet Russia did not build a rule of law is very true, and perhaps that is what has doomed it. Putin, I think, had a correct intuition that criminality was to be curbed, but being a Soviet man, he understood his mission as building an autocracy. The truth is that no matter how many oligarchs he puts behind bars, a society where the parliament votes 100% for an act of aggression that violates the countries' treaties with its neighbor does not have a rule of law.

One does not have to admire American geopolitical behavior to condemn this. There were some lines that we did not cross: we did not violate treaties; we did not fight for territory; we responded to perceived -- sometime wrongly perceived -- threats. We also honestly tried to build nations where - we now understand -- they cannot be built. We "took up the white man's burden". That is the difference between American imperialism and Russian aggression. We nevertheless acted in a way that allowed a dishonest or uninformed observer to point to our behavior in Iraq and Libya as an excuse of his own aggression. That was unwise; but RF is an aggressor in Ukraine just the same.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.