The following is a transcript of the broadcast at 4:05 pm EST February 24, 2022
LAURA COATES: I want to bring in our guest. Who knows these issues, quite well? He is the author of the book, a Red Line in the Sand, Diplomacy Strategy, and the History of Wars, That Might Still Happen. The book is ever-prescient about exactly where we are today. He also has a podcast at the same name, A Red Line in the Sand. It's David. Andelman, a veteran foreign correspondent author, and commentator on global affairs. He served for many years, as editor and publisher of World Policy Journal, and he tweets @DavidAndelman . He's also an opinion columnist for CNN. And in his latest one for CNN, he says that Vladimir Putin needs a history lesson, David, welcome back to the show. I've got to tell you, more and more on this show, I have such wonderful guests. Like you and many others who I desperately want to be wrong. Even though I rely on your expertise, I so want you to be wrong in matters of crises like this and yet you can quite be prescient about Putin as more than a provocateur.
DAVID ANDELMAN: I have to tell you, one thing. I've been thinking about this, and this is something that I did not tell your wonderful producer, Tony Fowler, but I'm going to say, it's a little bit out of left field. But do you remember back in 1990 when Saddam Hussein invaded and seized Kuwait? Just like, yes, because he wanted it. We invaded. Our troops invaded and took their country back for them. What's different? Oil was more valuable than democracy? How does this happen now?
LAURA: Hmm. Well, you know, your question must be a bit rhetorical, right? Because as we know our democracies are often overshadowed by capitalism for a variety of reasons, and we hope that altruism will be the main guiding principle, but we also know there are other considerations. The very question you asked begs the question that many on this show, as callers have called in about ,the notion of well, why is this different? Why is the United States on the one hand hands-off on the other hand intimately involved in the negotiations…by proxy and yet not on the ground. Help us to understand and contextualize why.
DAVID: Obviously, not being a part of NATO, this is why the United States is not essentially acting in the way it would have if you're part of NATO. But this is a democracy, a fledgling one. And we seek to protect that as well. I think because, you look back and look what Trump is saying that Russia had every right to be in there. There's a whole spectrum of opinion on this. And I've gotten some very nasty tweets, I have to tell you, after some pieces I've written, particularly after this last one on teaching Putin a history lesson. But I seriously doubt he ever will appreciate what happened to Ukraine the last time Ukraine became a part of Russia in the 1920s. It was after a bloody Civil War and it was the Bolsheviks, the Reds, the Communist, basically the antecedents of Putin who took that back and seized it back then in a bloody war. And, and so him for him to say, oh, it's into an integral part of Russia. It's never been an integral part of Russia. When they were the Kievan Rus, which was the predecessor of the current Ukrainian state back in around 1000 AD, when they were a flourishing, civilization—one of the greatest civilizations in Europe—Moscow was a bunch of a collection of mud huts on a river in northern Russia. It's just Insanity to think they've always been a part aloof Russia and should now be back there. It's just, it's ludicrous.
LAURA: Well, as ludicrous as is it is, Vladimir Putin seems to think it's still within his rightful spear sphere of influence and which means, if he thinks Ukraine is within that sphere of influence, then he likely thinks other countries that were once part of the Soviet Union that are actually NATO members would also be within that same sphere of influence. So, when you think about the fact that President Biden said, listen, I'm going to impose sanctions. He was sort of called to taken to task on that by reporters today in this very notion. Well, the sanctions themselves have not been a deterrent for him to invade, you threatened those before, and he still did it. What do you, David, make of the sanctions as? Are these really a fool's errand, not to be taken seriously? Or is there the potential that these sanctions could be impactful?
DAVID: Oh, no, I don't think they're a fool's errand at all. Just before I came on with you, I was on with Georgian television in Tbilisi, Georgia. You remember that was the last former Soviet Republic that Putin tried to take back in 2008. That didn't work out so well for him. A number of Russian soldiers got killed on their way to trying to take the capital. And now, all he was able to get was a couple of little slivers, that George still actually claims, but there were no sanctions really back. There were sanctions in Crimea, after Putin seized Crimea back in 2014. But today's sanctions, I've listened to them. They're kind of a joke in a way. I mean, it was just a slight extension of those Crimean sanctions. Well, we're going to sanction a few more banks, maybe a couple more oligarchs, maybe a couple more companies and so on. Biden didn't take the really hard steps that I think would get Putin's attention. He didn't sanction any of the oil industry, Rosneft, a state oil company or Gazprom, the state gas company. He didn't sanction any of them. He didn't say kick the Russians out of the SWIFT system, the global money transfer network that encompasses 11,000 banks in virtually every country. And that's how many gets transferred back and forth. Kicking the Russians out of that and sanctioning the oil industry, basically embargoing their oil, like, you know, we embargo Iranian oil, those would get people's attention, that would get Putin's attention I suspect. Because his whole country is based on money and oil, and if he can't move any of those things and he's really going to be in trouble. The problem is it would cost us as well. Prices might go up to at the pump to $8 a gallon, at least for a short period of time, but when must be prepared to take the kinds of measures that really are necessary in order to make those kinds of sanctions work. So well, it's a good thing that we did it. We had to do it. I like to say that he did the limits of the possible because also he has to get our allies and friends, especially in Europe who, frankly, are much more dependent on Russia, in terms of oil and gas and a lot of other things. So, Biden is constrained by the limits of the possible. Yes, but is that the limits of the, of the real of the concrete?
LAURA: One of the things I've raised earlier is why wouldn't President Biden actually sanction him. I mean, to sanction him financially and hit him in his pockets. You have to actually know where those pockets are. I mean slapping personal sanctions on Putin would require you to actually know how and where to target to freeze any viable assets and he has been, you know, he's not transparent and any of that.
DAVID: Well, you know Putin some people suggest he is actually the wealthiest single individual in the world, and I can believe that, but that's not to say that his wealth is going to be deposited in you know, Chase Manhattan or Goldman Sachs. He has carefully, very carefully, squirrelled this money away. Not only that, but what he has done very wisely over the last couple of years and most recently over the last year or so, he has removed the dollar as the principal means of exchange in the foundations of the Russian world. He's moved into gold. He's moved into the yuan (China's currency), he's moved into the yen, the Japanese currency, and moved to a degree into Euros. He is virtually out of the dollar economy. So, to say as we did a couple of weeks ago, well, they're not going to be able to sell their bonds anymore on the world economy. So what? He doesn't need to do that; he hasn't wanted to do that. He has been getting his own ducks in a row for a long time.
LAURA: So, in terms of where things stand, you mentioned in your latest piece for CNN, you believe that Vladimir Putin needs a history lesson of sorts. What do you what do you think that it entails for him?
DAVID: I think it entails for him to understand that Ukraine could be a very good customer and partner of Russia economically, a social partner, the partner of Russia just as it was when it was part of the Soviet Union, but as an independent country. There's no reason they can't get along effectively. Ukraine has almost become a part of the European Union. There was no reason why they can't divide their loyalties. There are gas pipelines from Russia that run through Ukraine into Western Europe. Ukraine could easily be tied both to Russia and to the west and for him not to be able understand that is very self-serving, very short-sighted. So, I think he's made an enormous mistake here.
LAURA: But unfortunately, it may be a mistake he's going to be able to get away with for a very long time. You know, one of the things that was asked of President Biden today by members of the press, had he underestimated Vladimir Putin. Let me play for you what President Biden's response was to that question of whether he underestimated, Vladimir Putin.
WHITE HOUSE NEWS CONFERENCE:
JOURNALIST: Did you underestimate Putin, and would you still describe them the way that you did in the summer as a worthy adversary?
BIDEN: At the time, I made it clear as an adversary and I said, he was worthy. I didn't underestimate him, and I've read most of everything he's written….You heard the speech. He made almost an hour's worth of speech on why he was going into Ukraine. He has much larger ambitions in Ukraine. He wants to, in fact re-establish, the former Soviet Union. That's what this is about, and I think that his ambitions are completely contrary to the place where the rest of the world has arrived.
LAURA: What do you make of that? Do you agree with the idea of his contrary ambition and terms of the pragmatism involved?
DAVID: 100%. I thought he was absolutely right. I disagree with Biden on some things. But he got that just right. Putin has said that the one of the greatest flaws in history was the end of the Soviet Union, and he is determined that his legacy will be to recreate the Soviet Union, to reverse those horrible decisions that were made in the past and create a colossus, and that's what he's been trying desperately to do. Of course, one of the problems is that a lot of these countries have gone off completely in their own direction. There are the three Baltic countries—Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. They were once Russian republics. Well, they are now members of the European Union and of NATO. So those three are really basically out of his reach. But Georgia, maybe certainly Ukraine, he thinks he can reel them back in. Not only that, but he's also really trying to establish his own new hierarchy of friends and allies. China's one of them. I found very interesting today not widely recognized, so I'll let you in on it first. Putin received Imran Khan, the prime minister of Pakistan in the Kremlin today just as the Russian troops were rolling through into Ukraine. And he received him not at some clownishly long table like he received Emmanuel Macron, of France, or Scholtz, the chancellor of Germany, but intimately. There were sitting down in little chairs right next to each other. I mean, that's shocking. These are the kinds of things that he is doing now to cement his hold on. And power is hold on the world. A world that he is creating his own image.
LAURA: What do you make of this? It strikes me as odd for a variety of reasons, but principally because one would think when you are engaged in a full-scale military Invasion, say of the second largest country in Europe. One would think that you don't have time to receive dignitaries in general. So, what do you make of this decision to have it be this Pakistani leader? And also, what message do you think he is trying to send given fact and there's the history of United States with Pakistan in particular.
DAVID: I think the message is very simple. You can do whatever you want to me, but I'm immune. I'm going to have my own friends. I'll go out and play on my own. I don't I don't need to be part of your club anymore. I have my own little club and it's working very effectively for me and I'm very happy with doing as I always have been doing and I will continue to do as I always have done, and there is nothing you can do to make me change. So don't even bother trying. He even throws out threats, like well, you know we’re a nuclear power. What is he going to do? Drop a tactical nuclear weapon on Ukraine? Oh my God. I mean that's just unbelievably inconceivable. On the other hand, he also has troops that also went through and seized the Chernobyl nuclear plant that had blown up some years ago and spread nuclear ash all over Europe. God knows what's going to happen now. There's talk that the outer shell where that meltdown of the reactor took place has now been pierced and radiation could start coming out of there. The horrors he has unleashed a really beyond comprehension.
LAURA: And then there's what's happening in terms of other nations and other leaders. President Biden did not comment on whether he was asking China to help. I'd like to play a quick clip with the president addressing that very issue.
WHITE HOUSE NEWS CONFERENCE:
JOURNALIST: If I could follow up, are you urging China to help isolate Russia?
BIDEN: I'm not prepared to comment at the moment.
LAURA: Hmm. What do you make of that? Well, you'll bet he's not, that's a very very very sensitive subject. Look what happens next and why? I mean, help us understand.
DAVID: Well, first of all, Putin and Xi [Jinping] have become very close over the last few years. About two months ago, the Russian oil company Gazprom signed a 30-year deal to supply gas to China denominated in euros, not dollars, which is usually the currency of choice for the international oil and gas community. So that was a huge help for Putin—a huge cushion though it won't start right away. Remember the Olympics. Putin was the only real head of state that that showed up there. He had his own Skybox. But China is in a very peculiar situation because remember, they want to take over Taiwan and they're watching. Let's see what happens. Let's see how the world reacts to taking over Ukraine right next door. We really want to take over Taiwan. And by the way, they have the military power in spades. They do overflights of Chinese jets every week. We want to take over Taiwan. So, let's see how the world reacts to that. And that's why I think Biden is treading very gingerly with respect to China. At the same time, China has been developing very close commercial, business, financial ties and trade with Europe and with the United States. This is not something that Xi can give up that easily. He's very worried that what if he actually sides too closely with Putin and he starts getting sucked into this whole sanctions regime—becomes a target of sanctions as well. It's interesting. China has not used its veto in the UN Security Council by itself since 1999. That's 20-23 years now. They are very leery to sort of stick their necks out to help anybody, especially like Putin when they really get in trouble.
LAURA: Well, let's talk about a country that you are intimately connected with and ties with, we've been watching Macron in terms of his relationship with Vladimir Putin as well. I mean, you are a Chevalier of the French Legion of Honor. And so obviously, you know, the political landscape of France. What do you make of the role of Macron in this entire crisis?
DAVID: Well, you know, I've just started SubStack blog called Andelman Unleashed. I put up the latest happenings, among other things, in the French election campaign, because Macron is about to stand for re-election after five-year term. It's up in April. He is the last major candidate, by the way, who hasn't actually declared yet. He's been kind of, say, distracted about this whole thing. The question he has like another 10 days to declare.
LAURA: Sorry, out of curiosity. Is the declaration largely sort of a ceremonial thing and that he's automatically on the ballot or does he actually have to declare? Otherwise, he can lose the opportunity to run again.
DAVID: He actually has to declare. But not only that, he also has to acquire 500, Godfather signatures of 500 different mayor's all over France. There are, you know, thousands of mayors in France. Ever little village has a mayor, but every candidate in order to get on the ballot have to have 500 signatures. Well, he passed that level a while ago, obviously, any sitting president would. But we are less than seven weeks till the actual first round of the elections and he hasn't even gone out campaigning yet. Now, I don't think the French care very much what happens in Ukraine is as the case for most Americans. Nevertheless, he has to campaign. Still, today, for the first six months this year, France is the chairman of the European Union. It's a rotating thing that each country gets six months in that position. So, it happens he is the chairman of Europe, basically, the chairman of the board, and he has had to do all of this stuff. And by the way, he's got to try and win re-election. Now, he's leading in the polls. But only with about 25%. Now, there are 13 candidates in the first round. So, 25% is actually not a bad number for the first round, then the top two candidates stand two weeks later in the second and final round. But April 10th, French voters are going to pronounce on whether he's done a decent job. Now, whether they care very much about the fact that he was not able to prevent war in Ukraine I doubt they'll care very much about that at all. They will care very much about covid and a whole other lot of other issues.
LAURA: When we talk about the United States and allies obviously eyes are then on Germany, as another world leader, and the chancellor there who needs to effectuate the same sort of policy or beefing up of a military presence. What kind of ally in this scenario would he be?
DAVID: Well, it would, you know, it certainly Germany would have been a firm and stolid ally when Angela Mark Merkel was the chancellor of Germany. But she's not. I did my last column before this one for CNN on whether Micron had become the West's "Putin whisperer"—someone who really understood Putin and could interpret him. Now I think there's some question of whether he really was able to do that very effectively, or whether anybody could have for that matter. But Angela Merkel did do that. And very effectively. She spoke Russian. She was from the eastern part of Germany, the old East Germany, when Putin was the head of the KGB office in Dresden. So, you know, she they got along. They had a relationship. He got inside his head I think the way no other world leader, certainly no other Western leader has. Still, today, the United States has to get along with Germany, and we have, except when Trump came into office. That's another whole story. But now Scholtz is a very weak leader. That is not to say that he is a weak person. Still, he's no Angela Merkel by any means. He has a very tenuous coalition. He's just barely squeaked through as Chancellor. He is not in a very powerful position and that's a little scary frankly, especially at a time like this. We need a strong leader in Germany. When have a strong leader in France. We certainly need one that we can rely on. In Britain, I think we sort of have one, also in Italy. But Germany and France are the really the two bulwarks of the Western alliance in Europe, and we'll just have to see how it plays out. I hope, but frankly the reactions to the U.S. and its sanctions. It's not giving me a lot of encouragement.
LAURA: What do you think needs to be done? I know you've spoken about some criticism of President Biden about the sanctions and the perhaps futility of them as a deterrent. Would be the message to send this? Of course, as we're looking at explosions in multiple Ukrainian cities as Russia is invading.
DAVID: Obviously, the idea of talking intellectually about economic sanctions, seems absurd when you see the devastation already unfolding. However, that is a form of, forgive the pun, currency when it comes to diplomacy in this in this world. But there are other things as well. Just remember when the Russians invaded Afghanistan and threw the Taliban out. We actually subsidized the Taliban militarily. We helped them a lot. We gave them surface-to-air, missiles. We gave them rocket-propelled grenades. We gave him all kinds of advanced weapons that they could use against the Russians. And that worked very effectively. Frankly, that's one of the things really, finally drove the Russians out of Afghanistan—being attacked so effectively. Sending so many of them back home in body bags, that could start happening to Putin. That's what frankly did in Gorbachev at the end, that finally killed Gorbachev as the last head of the Soviet Union. So, I think that certainly we have to help them as it's going to be a resistance, we have to do everything we can to make sure that resistance works. I think we have to do something beyond these sanctions. I think removing Russia from SWIFT, sanctioning their oil industry. I think that would help a lot. But as I said, the president of the United States has to do the limits of the possible. And those limits are very circumscribed right now.
LAURA: There's so much to consider as the story unfolds before us.
DAVID: Right, so I'm sorry to be so downbeat. You know when I when I go in your show my son, calls me up, he actually hears it from Paris online….but he's like we Dad you're always, you know, Debbie Downer. I mean, what do I do? Frankly. I'm being realistic.
LAURA: Well, I would think much less if you if you were very upbeat about a war. We can never judge ourselves by how our kids see us unless it's flattering, but that’s the only way it works. Then we all know……David Andelman, veteran journalist and author of A Red Line in the Sand: Diplomacy, Strategy and the History of Wars, That Might Still Happen. He's an opinion columnist for CNN. He's also the podcast host of the same thing, A Red Line in the Sand and now a SubStack blogger as well, which is called Andelman Unleashed. There you go. I love it. And he tweets @DavidAndelman.