Putin's Master Plan

To Destroy Europe, Divide NATO, and Restore Russian Power and Global Influence

Douglas E. Schoen, Evan Roth Smith

• Publisher: Encounter Books
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781594038907
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Russian Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Vladimir Putin has a master plan to destroy Europe, divide NATO, reclaim Russian influence in the world, and most of all to marginalize the United States and the West in order to achieve regional hegemony and global power. Putin’s unified strategy and vision for Europe has not been thoroughly discussed or articulated in any meaningful way until now. Putin’s Master Plan is the first comprehensive attempt to systematically explain Putin’s global strategy, which could inevitably and inexorably lead to the breakup of the NATO alliance, and potentially to war with the West. Currently, the West has no strategy, no plan, and no tactics to confront Putin’s master plan other than imposing limited economic sanctions, which have done little to deter Putin's aggression—and may well have encouraged and facilitated it. The viewpoint taken here is not just alarmism, but an accurate and, for the first time, clear and sober portrayal of a frightening situation that, more and more, serious observers of European and Russian politics are openly recognizing and acknowledging. Putin’s Master Plan makes the case that it is essential to wake up to Putin’s strategy to destroy Europe, divide NATO, and build a new empire in the former Soviet Union. Russia has demonstrated an extraordinary level of aggression, most boldly in its outright invasions of Georgia and Ukraine. American weakness and a divided Europe have left Russia’s terrified neighbors without an alternative to Russian domination, and even once-stalwart American allies such as the Republic of Georgia are on the brink of becoming part of Putin’s new empire in Europe. Putin has made it clear that he sees NATO expansion as a fundamental threat to Russian nationhood, and he is systematically challenging the NATO Alliance as well as the United States. So far, he is winning.

CHAPTER 1

The Transatlantic Relationship in the Twenty-First Century

In times like this, when the security of the Euro-Atlantic area is challenged, the North Atlantic Alliance has not wavered. And it will not waver. For 65 years, we have been clear in our commitment to one another as Allies.

—NATO SECRETARY GENERAL ANDERS FOGH RASMUSSEN¹

Today, the situation in Europe and America is grim. The transatlantic relationship, forged in the aftermath of World War II to resist Soviet expansion, has deteriorated to a breaking point. Russia has invaded Ukraine and is challenging American power around the world. Migrants from the Middle East and North Africa are streaming across the Mediterranean and up through Turkey, driving a crisis of identity and culture that threatens to end the European Union as we know it, and already appears to have driven Britain from the EU. Economically, the postrecession “new normal” of slow growth and declining labor force participation has left millions of working Americans and Europeans struggling to make ends meet. Politically, far-right nationalists and far-left socialists are gaining in Europe, while in America the Democratic and Republican parties are failing to inspire an increasingly dissatisfied electorate. The transatlantic community is in worse shape than at any point since the end of the Cold War, and we have almost certainly not seen the worst of it yet.

No one has taken a keener interest in the West’s weakness than Vladimir Putin. He has seized the opportunity that Western vulnerability presents, driving internal and external crises, leveraging Russian advantages, and rebuilding the Kremlin’s global power and importance. Putin has struck at the core of the transatlantic alliance, breeding Euro-skeptical parties that want to do away with the EU and encouraging anti-American politicians who advocate for the dissolution of NATO. Putin has fostered and fomented crises from Syria to Ukraine and beyond, starting fires faster than the West can put them out, while exhausting our resources and willpower. Putin has even gone after American and European allies, cutting arms deals with Washington-aligned Arab nations and rekindling old Soviet connections in Latin America and Africa. Putin and Russia have launched nothing less than a full frontal assault against the transatlantic alliance.

Of course, Russia faces many challenges of its own, not least of which are the demographic implications of a shrinking, graying population and the persistent challenges of an economy that depends almost entirely on oil and gas exports. In many ways, Russia remains, per German chancellor Helmut Schmidt’s famous formulation, “Upper Volta with missiles.”² Putin is a strongman dictator who has short-circuited Russia’s democratic system, ruling over a deeply troubled and divided society that has used petrodollars to paper over the unresolved political, economic, and psychological scars of the Soviet collapse. At a fundamental level, America and Europe are far-stronger societies with considerably greater resources, stability, and potential than Russia. But far from being a comfort, this disparity should make us even more concerned that we have been unable to confront Putin’s propaganda, warmongering, and aggression. It raises troubling questions about the consequences of Western peace and prosperity and whether we have become so complacent in our success that we no longer understand the need to defend it—let alone possess the nerve or courage to do so.

THE WESTERN INHERITANCE

The situation was not always so dire. At the turn of the millennium, the transatlantic community seemed reinvigorated and poised for a century of success. The shocking events of September 11, 2001, shattered the post–Cold War peace but gave new purpose and a sense of mission to institutions that had floundered in the 1990s, bereft of the Soviet foe that they were built to oppose. Victory over the Soviet Union had seemingly enshrined the West as the unchallenged political and economic leader of the world community; now the threat of violent Islamic extremism represented a new opportunity for NATO to flex its muscles against an enemy that only understood force, while leaders in Europe and America banded together in defense of human rights and universal values. When America invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty on October 4, 2001, obliging other NATO members to join in its response against al-Qaeda and the Taliban, no one was eager to go to war. But the Western allies understood the seriousness of the threat and stood shoulder to shoulder in support of common values.

Indeed, in the early 2000s, we possessed so much clarity of purpose that the very definitions of “the West” and “the transatlantic community” expanded to include historically Western countries that had been trapped behind the Iron Curtain but earned their way into our community through hard-fought political reform, tough economic sacrifices, and unwavering dedication to replacing Communism with liberal democracies. Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic became NATO members in 1999 and were joined by Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia in 2004. All these countries went on to join the European Union, with integration efforts ongoing today.

The process of including former Communist countries in Western institutions has frequently been contentious, but debate and indeed profound disagreement are all hallmarks of open, democratic decision making. When NATO and the EU opened their doors to the countries of the former Eastern Bloc, no one expected a painless integration process. But the United States and its European allies put in the work to get it right, confident that Western values were worth defending and promoting. Today, this commitment is no longer evident. Putin has noticed our wavering devotion to Western values and our lackadaisical defense of core Western ideals.

America and Western Europe share many political and cultural values and a deep generational bond forged in the fires of twentieth-century history. Even today, any American or European crossing the Atlantic for business or pleasure senses the closeness between our societies. It is a remarkable outcome of history that a Wisconsinite can travel thousands of miles to Germany and find values, churches, and even beers that are familiar. Similarly, a culturally minded resident of London, Paris, or Milan feels at home in the chic cafes and arthouse cinemas of Manhattan’s Greenwich Village. This common cultural expanse of the West, internally diverse but profoundly united, underpins the transatlantic project. As important as the political and economic institutions of the West are, we must remember that they are not ends in themselves: they exist to preserve and protect our civilizational values. It is worth reminding ourselves what these values are and what they mean.

First and foremost, these values transcend the Left-Right political divide, excepting the radical fringes on both sides. Western values are the arena within which our political discourse occurs. Indeed, the values themselves make democratic politics possible.

Human rights are the foundation of all the other rights. The most succinct, direct explication of these rights is found in America’s Declaration of Independence: “All men are created equal, . . . endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Jefferson’s words, over two centuries old, were revolutionary not only for their assertion of these rights but also for their contention that they were God given, not government created; governments could not give or take them away. What governments could do, and what they continue to do today, is fail to observe these rights. Recent years have seen Vladimir Putin’s contempt for human rights and liberties, whether through shooting down a plane full of civilians, jailing journalists and activists, or outlawing free speech for homosexuals. A similar disregard for human dignity is shown by the North Korean, Chinese, and Iranian governments, as well as by ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram, among other flagrant violators of human rights around the world. The West must remain committed to promoting these rights and defending vulnerable people and populations, from imprisoned journalists to persecuted minorities.

Free economies—allowing individuals to trade, contract, and create with one another on their own terms, for their own benefit, and in whatever role or capacity they choose—are another cornerstone of Western societies. In Europe, the many varieties of a free economy have yielded democratic-socialist societies in Scandinavia, entrepreneurial capitalism in Poland and the Baltics, and resilient industrial societies in Western Europe. In America, we have built the wealthiest society in history through a spirit of restless invention and innovation. But in corrupt petrostates like Russia, government elites and Kremlin-dependent oligarchs control the nation’s hydrocarbon-dependent wealth, while entrepreneurs and the highly educated flee to the West, where their talents can be rewarded.

Liberal democracy ensures popular control of government, holds public officials accountable to the citizenry through free and fair elections, and sets clear limits on the power of the state to interfere in the lives of private citizens. The forms liberal democracies take vary, from two-party republics like America’s to multiparty parliamentary monarchies like the United Kingdom’s. In these societies, governments exist for the sake of the population they represent, not for the sake of preserving and perpetuating their own rule. The ultimate good is considered the good of the people, rather than the preservation of a royal family, the enrichment of oligarchs, or the creation of an ideological utopia. Churchill famously said that democracy was the worst form of government except for all the others, and this remains the case. To be sure, democracy rarely produces results quickly or resolves disputes decisively or neatly—and over the last decade or so, political discontent in the West, including in the United States, has led many to doubt the integrity of governing institutions and even the future of democracy itself. Clearly, Western citizens and political leaders must work to improve the political institutions that ensure representative government and open societies. But one need only contrast admittedly imperfect American and European democracies with Putin’s authoritarianism, Iran’s theocracy, or China’s communist totalitarianism to understand what the other choices are.

Putin’s attempts to subvert the progress of liberal democracy in Europe and co-opt European political parties to serve Russian strategic ends, which we detail in later chapters, should alarm anyone who believes in democratic values. (His efforts are unwittingly aided by many well-meaning Europeans at the top echelons of the EU, who have lost their taste for liberal democracy, preferring bureaucratic top-down control.) The West’s key values of human rights, a free economy, and liberal democracy have made our societies the envy of the world in living standards, education, political liberty, and personal happiness. But since the Soviet Union’s collapse, many have taken Western values for granted. At the outset of the 1990s, political scientist Francis Fukuyama went as far as to predict the “end of history” and the global triumph of Western values.³ But history itself intervened, spoiling this hopeful forecast.

UNDER ATTACK

A quick scan of the headlines demonstrates the precarious state of our world: Putin’s neo-Tsarist Russia is establishing imperial zones of influence in Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East; radical Islamic extremists are attempting to rebuild the caliphate in Iraq and Syria; China’s totalitarian communist regime remains globally ascendant; Bolivarian Socialists are in power in nearly a dozen Latin American countries; the ayatollah’s theocracy in Iran is on track to become a nuclear state; the Taliban retains control of large areas in Afghanistan and Pakistan; the countries of West and Central Africa are beset by intercommunal violence and public health nightmares. Outside of the West itself, human rights, free economies, and liberal democracy appear to be in retreat. And even in Western Europe and the United States, political correctness is undermining our commitment to these values.

Vladimir Putin certainly does not believe in human rights, at least not according to any recognizable Western conception of them. Nor do many among the Russian elite and the majority of the general populace. Putin does not preside over a free economy, and he has proven himself a committed enemy of liberal democracy. He understands, perhaps better than we do, that the West’s military power, economic strength, and political will are dependent on our core values. If we allow our commitment to these values to waver, and Russian aggression to undermine our confidence in the West’s ability to overcome challenges while remaining true to its core principles, then Russia will gain at our expense. If we fail to defend human rights, Russia will continue to disregard them. If we don’t promote free economies, then Putin and his obedient oligarchs will continue to direct the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people. If we don’t stand up for liberal democracy, then Putin will continue to govern Russia with an iron fist until the day a handpicked successor inherits his authoritarian regime.

Western values matter. They have made us happy, prosperous, and free. The transatlantic alliance can and must do more to protect and promote them, both internally and around the world.

Together, the two sides of the North Atlantic—the United States on one side and Western Europe on the other—constitute the greatest political, military, economic, and cultural force in human history. While exact definitions of “the West” vary, and no single institution or organization should be taken to represent the full breadth and depth of the transatlantic relationship, there is doubtless a common civilizational space spanning Alaska to the borders of Eastern Europe, with outposts in places like Australia and Japan. This area accounts for just under one-seventh of the world’s population but about half of its global economic output⁴ and the overwhelming preponderance of the world’s military strength, and it is where many globally influential centers of culture reside, including New York, London, Los Angeles, and Paris. What happens in the West reverberates across the world. This can be a problem, as it was when the bursting of the American housing bubble precipitated a global economic recession. But it is also a key strength that the West can leverage to the betterment of humanity, as it does when the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded to someone like Malala Yousafzai, or when Western economies produce world-changing technologies like the Internet.

Cultural and economic advantages have limits, however, when posed against a determined adversary like Putin, along with his anti-Western allies in Beijing, Tehran, Pyongyang, and elsewhere. They’re not especially useful in the effort to combat Putin’s power grab in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. The Nobel Peace Prize is influential precisely because it is largely apolitical (at least in principle), and inventions like the Internet come about when brilliant minds are free to innovate without political interference. So it is difficult to bring Western culture or economics to bear in a systematic way against authoritarians like Putin without compromising our own values and handing him a moral victory. Economic sanctions against Russia have had some effect, but Putin has been adept at evading them and finding other less scrupulous trading partners in Asia and the Middle East. Our European partners can still do considerably more to abide by the sanctions they have agreed to. Russians may like Western culture, but there is plenty of Russian-language media to keep them happy. It seems unlikely that we would ever go so far as to restrict Russian tourism to the West altogether.

That leaves one Western strength that can be brought unambiguously into the fray against Putin’s aggression, and that stands explicitly at the command of our political leaders: military power. NATO countries account for slightly more than half of global military spending,⁵ or about $893 billion in 2015.⁶ Our militaries are not as strong as they should be, and the Russian military is making gains, but there is little doubt that NATO possesses the most powerful military in history. It is especially remarkable that this unequaled force was created not ...