CNN —
Ukraine’s stunning recapture of vast swathes of Russian-held territory renews focus on the most chilling unknown of a war already marked by extreme cruelty – the depths to which a beleaguered Vladimir Putin can descend.
The huge gains by Ukrainian forces in recent days are a tribute to the bravery of troops fighting for the survival of a nation, a shrewd military strategy and yet more evidence of failures among Russia’s once-famous armed forces.
They also represent a victory for the Western policy of steadfast support for the government of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Kiev’s advance validates the US strategy of sending billions of dollars worth of weapons and ammunition to Ukrainian forces in what would previously have been an unheard-of modern proxy war in Europe.
But they also raise the question of how Putin, facing embarrassment on the battlefield and signs of rare political pressure at home, might respond, recalling fears earlier in the war that he might reach for chemical weapons or even a tactical nuclear device as a last resort. .
“The Russian regime is in trouble, I believe, and they must be overthrown,” said retired Army Brig. Gen. Peter Zwack on CNN Monday afternoon. “They are backed into a corner domestically and not internationally, which makes this all very dangerous,” he said.
Footage of scenes of liberation in Ukraine was greeted with glee in Washington, and as yet another major twist in a war that has often proved unpredictable.
“I think it’s a pivotal moment. It’s really turned what was otherwise a war of attrition and clearly given Ukraine an advantage here that gives it a boost at a critical time,” former CIA Director and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said on “The Lead with Jake Tapper” CNN on Monday. .
Ukraine’s advance quickly recaptured 6,000 square kilometers (about 2,300 square miles) in the east and south of the country, according to the Kiev government. Its troops are pushing forward in the northeastern region of Kharkiv and conducting a smaller offensive in the south.
In a potentially significant political development, Russia’s losses have outstripped Moscow despite a crackdown on independent media. Some television commentators and bloggers criticized the conduct of the war and the Kremlin admitted that Putin was aware of the developments, although he insisted that the “special operation” in Ukraine would succeed. In a show of considerable courage given Putin’s repressive record, lawmakers in 18 Russian regions called for his resignation, though it would be unwise to over-interpret this as a sign of widespread rebellion.
The unexpected developments in Ukraine will provide new openings for Western governments looking to further increase pressure on Putin, but may also require a new recalibration of US military and other aid and a re-examination of options for Ukraine as it tries to oust its troops. of Moscow from all over its territory. The US says it remains committed to giving Ukraine what it needs to continue its fight against Russia, although that could change after November’s midterm elections if Republicans less willing to support a foreign war win control of Congress.
A key question for the US is whether US military aid that initially included anti-tank weapons and small arms, then included items such as drones and howitzers, may now need to be readjusted to help Zelensky’s armed forces consolidate control in newly occupied land and to fend off any Russian counterattack.
“Now the war is entering a new stage where the ability to move forces under fire and exploit weaknesses in Russian lines is paramount,” said Rafael Loss, coordinator for Pan-European data projects at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Western leaders could help Ukraine build on the successes and liberate more land with tanks and armored vehicles, Los said.
Beyond tactical considerations, Ukraine’s foray into previously held Russian territory raises the question of how Putin, who has invested enormous credibility in a war he has framed as a broader conflict against the West, might react to the reversals.
Military analysts said the breakthroughs by Ukrainian troops over the weekend are the most significant in the war since Russia abandoned its bid to capture the capital Kyiv in the first weeks after the invasion.
Considering the latest Ukrainian victories, Zelensky almost mocked Putin in a Telegram post addressed to Russia on Sunday, asking: “Do you still think we are ‘one nation?’ Do you still think you can scare us, break us, make us retreat?’
But tempering the euphoria in the West is not just the reality that war can be unpredictable and battlefield gains can be reversed. It is the realization that if Russia is facing heavy casualties that are politically unpalatable to the rogue Russian leader, Ukrainian victories may just usher the war into a dangerous new phase.
The invasion showed Putin’s indifference to human carnage and the willingness shown earlier in the conflicts in Chechnya and Syria to terrorize civilians and level cities. Tens of thousands of Russian forces have been killed, according to Western intelligence, but Putin has said his country has lost nothing in the invasion.
So it is very likely that Putin will use the defeats as an incentive to launch attacks on liberated areas from the air or with artillery and rockets. Another area of potential leverage is Russia’s seizure of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, Europe’s largest, which has led international nuclear officials to warn that Moscow is “playing with fire” and risks disaster.
Given the importance of the conflict to Putin, Western generals also do not rule out Russian forces digging deep into defensive lines for a protracted war of attrition that could give them time to resupply and regroup.
There have long been fears in the West about how Putin would react if he appeared to be losing the war in Ukraine, with concern over whether he might escalate the use of chemical weapons. And the possibility of Russia developing even a limited-yield nuclear weapon in the event its troops are on the run has not been ruled out by Western generals, even as the US has said there is no sign Moscow is moving its nuclear arsenal. far away. Ukraine’s top military officer, General Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, warned of the imminent threat of tactical nuclear weapons use by Moscow, Reuters reported last week.
Any development of weapons of mass destruction would again risk the kind of escalation between Russia – the world’s largest nuclear power – and Washington that President Joe Biden has tried to avoid at all costs. The desire to prevent such a scenario has led him to prevent NATO allies in Eastern Europe from sending military aircraft to Ukraine in the belief that Putin could see this as an unacceptable direct intervention in the war by the alliance. Similar questions may arise if the US considers sending tanks or other similar weapons to Ukraine in a new phase of the war.
The difficult thing for the West has always been trying to figure out where Putin’s red lines are. So far they have not crossed paths. But no one knows if that will change – and Putin has successfully sown a mystique around him that makes it impossible to judge precisely how extreme he might go.
“Whether he has lines he wouldn’t cross — it’s hard to know,” said Bradley Woodworth, a Russia expert and associate professor of history at the University of New Haven. “It makes it devilishly difficult, I’m sure, to have a coherent policy when things are so fluid.”
“It’s scary. How would we know what his line would be on using tactical nuclear weapons?’
Even if no such step is taken, there will be increased scrutiny in the coming days in US and Western capitals over Putin’s next move, especially if criticism of Moscow grows.
One possibility is that Putin could step up his efforts to put Western publics, and the politicians who guide them, under severe pressure in the winter months, using Russia’s vital role as Europe’s energy supplier as a weapon.
CNN’s Natasha Bertrand, Katie Bo Lillis and Phil Mattingly reported Monday that the White House was already concerned that cutting off Russian oil and gas supplies could cause cracks in the Western alliance.
The idea that Putin might respond in a less inflammatory way – by seeking a way out of the war – is undermined both by Ukraine’s determination to expel the Russians from all of their territory after an unprovoked invasion and by the utter lack of any trust between Moscow and Kiev, as evidenced by Zelensky’s taunts. This, along with the vast political capital Putin has invested in the war, explains the failure so far to generate diplomatic spending for the Russian leader.
But Panetta argued that with continued Ukrainian gains and long-term Western support to allow more progress on the battlefield, Putin could end up in a vulnerable position facing a difficult choice.
“This is the strategy that…
