March 4, 2022 • 41 mins
Lt. Col. (Ret.) Alexander Vindman, the former Director for European Affairs for the United States National Security Council, gives us a history lesson on Ukraine and Russia, speaks to Putin's miscalculations, and talks about the power of democracy. Additionally, he talks about the dangers while giving potential outcomes regarding the current war in Ukraine.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Alex Vindman (00:02):
Putin's aspirations were always for
Ukraine were always to foldUkraine back in, and everything
else was kind of a pretext ofsorts for war, saying that he
had no choice because NATO wasexpanding all this other stuff.
But it's always been aboutUkraine. He started a war in
2014. He thought he had doneenough damage, frankly, when he
annexed Crimea. And when hestarted a war in eastern Ukraine
(00:24):
to rescue Ukraine's progresstowards towards the west, but in
fact, he actually acceleratedit. He was a galvanizing force.
Charlie Malone (00:36):
Welcome to Season Two of the policy bets
podcast, engaging with leaders,scholars and strong voices to
fill a void in support of PolicyDevelopment for America's
veterans. With your host formerSecretary of Veterans Affairs,
Dr. David Shulkin. And theExecutive Director of Policy
beds, Louis Celli, today's guestLieutenant Colonel Alexander
(00:56):
vindman, a retired United StatesArmy officer and former director
for European Affairs for the USNational Security Council.
Louis Celli (01:06):
Well, Mr.
Secretary, here we arewitnessing the first full scale
invasion of a European nation byanother in over 80 years. I
mean, it's truly sad for thepeople, Ukraine and democracy
overall.
Dr. David Shulkin (01:18):
Yeah, it certainly is. But, you know, I
think that even watching thetragedy unfold, and who knows
what the future is gonna hold.
There still are some reallyhopeful signs coming out of
Ukraine, and also some importantlessons for the world to see how
to respond to military invasionslike this. Well, global
Louis Celli (01:42):
politics is a lot to follow. And, you know, while
wars and fighting in Asia arebrought to the attention of the
American public, largely throughAmerican involvement, or through
the reporting of outrageoushuman, human rights violations,
European politics feels muchmore intimate. I mean, for
instance, Brexit was closelycovered here in the United
States, and the royal family isin the news daily. I don't think
(02:05):
there's anyone that doesn't knowthat the Queen has COVID.
Dr. David Shulkin (02:09):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's true. And it is
amazing watching this play outin front of our eyes. I think
we're really lucky today to haveColonel vindman, to talk to us
about how to understand whatwe're seeing both in terms of
not only the historical and thestrategic issues that we're
(02:30):
watching, but also watching thisunfold so quickly, and how to
interpret the events, and howit's likely to impact the
future, this is really going tobe an important podcast.
Louis Celli (02:42):
I couldn't agree more. I was stationed in Germany
twice during my military career,once at the height of the Cold
War. And then again, at thecollapse of the Soviet Union, as
matter of fact, I was in Berlinwhen the wall came down. And,
you know, I was one of the firstAmerican soldiers to interact
with a foreign East Germansoldier. So I've seen firsthand
the difference between a freemarket economy and what a
(03:03):
communist economy looks like.
Yeah,
Dr. David Shulkin (03:05):
and glue. I think it's so important that you
talk about that, because manyAmericans, and I certainly hear
this all the time you say, Idon't understand why we are have
our troops over in Europe, inKorea, all over the world. Why
are we doing that? Those wereold times? You know, that was
World War Two. But I think thisallows Americans to understand
(03:31):
why it's important that Americamaintains its strength in its
world leadership position,because who just a few months
ago would have really everimagined that we'd be in this
situation today.
Louis Celli (03:45):
It's absolutely right. And here's the
difference. You know, once asociety has lived in a free and
democratic economy, I don'tthink it's possible to go back.
I just I don't see how that'spossible.
Dr. David Shulkin (03:58):
Well, the way it's possible is through lots of
human tragedy and a lot ofsuffering. And you know,
certainly people aren't going todo it under their free will. And
so, so we're watching this asthe Braves Ukrainians stand up
to this tyranny right now. Andlet's, let's hope that the
ending to this is one that wecan all feel was worth it,
(04:24):
because there's going to be alot of people that suffer in the
meantime.
Louis Celli (04:28):
It's true. The only other example we have of
anything like this in our time,is when Hong Kong was turned
back over from the British toChina to Chinese rule, and that
was through a treaty. So I mean,that was and not only that Hong
Kong is different. They'reisolated, they're an island. So
the last time that an invasionlike this was successful, was
during the dawn of theinformation age, when radio and
(04:50):
printed newspaper were the onlymedia available that was the
only the only voice that peopleheard.
Dr. David Shulkin (04:56):
Well, I also think we saw something similar
with the talent band though. Butagain, that was a that was an
intra country conflict and, youknow, somewhat tribal in nature.
And this one's different this isthis is breaking across, you
know, internationally acceptedboundaries. And so we'll, we'll
(05:18):
need to see exactly where thisgoes. But I think what's so
interesting about our podcastguest today is is that he not
only is able to interpret what'shappening through a historical
lens, he's able to go out andtalk about where he thinks this
is going to end and what itmeans for the future
relationships between Europe,the United States and Russia.
Louis Celli (05:41):
It's absolutely true. And, you know, I think
what we may hear is that, youknow, Vladimir Putin had
severely miscalculated the humanresolve of the Ukrainian people,
as we're seeing play out on thenews today, and Ukrainian
president Solinsky has basicallyturned into an international
folk hero, you know, which onlyserved to strengthen the resolve
(06:04):
of the overwhelminginternational disdain for
Russian aggression.
Dr. David Shulkin (06:09):
Yeah, I think that's an accurate reflection of
today's picture, but never ontheir estimate. Lattimer Putin,
he, he's been doing this a longtime, he has a pretty good sense
of what is still left for him interms of, you know, tricks up
(06:29):
his sleeve, as well as hissignificant military power. So
no one should be overconfidentin where we are today.
Louis Celli (06:39):
Well, I really can't wait to get Lieutenant
Colonel vindman. In here. Hewas, as you know, born in
Ukraine, he immigrated to theUnited States as a child ended
up working at the White House,you know, the director of
European Affairs for theNational Security Council, and
he's a regular commentator onCNN and MSNBC. So we're lucky to
have him today.
Dr. David Shulkin (06:57):
Yep. So let's, let's hear what he has to
say.
Louis Celli (07:08):
Lieutenant Colonel vindman, thank you for making
time to join us today at thepositive. That's podcast, we
really appreciate it.
Unknown (07:13):
Thank you for having me on.
Dr. David Shulkin (07:15):
Colonel, I wanted to get right into some of
the current events that arehappening in the Ukraine today
in terms of both how ourlisteners should think about
what's happening bothhistorically, but also
strategically, in terms of whatthey're watching. And actually
(07:35):
you helping them understand iton CNN, and lots of other
outlets, I'm sure. But give usyour sense where things are
today.
Alex Vindman (07:44):
Yeah. So I mean, those are fundamental questions
on how we got here. And thatcould be in the big scale.
Because the shared historybetween Russia and Ukraine and
their predecessors, goes back1000 years. And for somebody
like Vladimir Putin, he, hethinks about long term
(08:06):
historical legacies. And hethinks about the fact that
Russia and Ukraine areindivisible, and that Ukraine is
a part of Russia. And what wasknown as you had greater Russia,
which is a Russian Empire,little Russia was Ukraine and
Belarus. Those are the three thecore of the Empire. That's the
way he sees the world. They dothey they're constantly intermix
(08:28):
in constant interaction betweenthese populations and these
people. But there's also apersistent feature of struggle
for self determinationindependence on initially it was
from Russia and from Muscovy,away from the the Kiev and
rousse princely states whereKiev is the capital of Ukraine,
but when it was founded a longtime ago is the dominant power
(08:51):
was Keven rousse and then afterthe Mongol hordes sacked the
city and depopulated it andallowed for the, for the
predecessor to, to Russia tostart to, to merge and
consolidate and they emerged asa power of vassal power of the
Mongol horde. And slowly butsurely this you know, what used
(09:13):
to be the lesser became thegreater and slowly started to
dominate the region. Much of themodern history, if we could call
it that goes back to about the17th century where the
Ukrainians were trying to pavetheir own way as an independent
country and made the illconceived decision to partner
(09:37):
with Russia, when they weretrying to establish their
independence from Poland andLithuania, this there was a
Polish Lithuanian Commonwealthand the Ottoman Empire and so
forth. And Russia took that aslicense to slowly kind of assert
dominance, but that was over allof Ukraine. That was all over
eastern Ukraine. And by the timeyou get to you jump forward to
(09:58):
the 19th and 20th centurythere's kind of a firm movement
for Ukrainian identity. There isa Ukrainian renaissance in terms
of language, in terms ofculture, poetry and things of
that nature in a brief period ofindependence in the 20th
century, after the collapse ofthe Russian Empire, and the Red
Army crushes that prettyquickly, and it still is not the
(10:20):
entirety of Ukraine, because theWestern ports that are creating
Alicia or Alicia were part ofthe Austro Hungarian empire and
then part of Poland. And it'snot really until after you get
to World War Two, that thecountry takes shape as it looks
like now. And after World WarTwo acquires the the territory
(10:41):
of Crimea. Now, the reason thatPutin claims you know, that
they're this is one one peopleis that there was a Russian
chauvinism, a deep Russianchauvinism over a dominance over
other kinds of Slavicpopulations. And there's an
animist because Ukraine was bothresponsible for the creation of
(11:06):
the Soviet Union, how it looked,why it was 15 states, because
there was a discussion at onepoint about establishing a
communist Russian Empire. ButUkraine's demands for for kind
of autonomy for a recognition asa separate population, as well
as Georgia has forced the forcedLenin to accept 15 different
(11:26):
states. And as much as that wasUkraine, that was the kind of
the genesis for the SovietUnion. It was also the genesis
for the collapse of the SovietUnion, because on December
1 1991, the Ukrainian populationvoted overwhelmingly 90% voted
for independence. And withoutUkraine, there was no ability to
(11:49):
sustain the Soviet Union,Yeltsin, Gorbachev and Yeltsin.
In particular, Yeltsin goes onthe record and saying, I'm not
going to try to establish aunion without Ukraine, because
then we'd be dominated by, youknow, non white Russians and
stuff like that. So Putinunderstands this, he either he's
got a grievance there, thatUkraine was responsible for the
(12:10):
greatest tragedy of the20th 20th century. And for the
entirety of the post Sovietperiod, Russia has been trying
to assert control over Ukraine,and assert, initially with
economic levers, because therewere plenty of them, Ukraine and
Russia were tied and everythingkind of felt toward, went
towards the center of Moscow.
And then once that once, hecouldn't do that with with
(12:33):
military force. And that's theprecursor to this now.
Dr. David Shulkin (12:38):
So Alex, all that history is really important
and relevant. And I think thebiggest question that I hear in
talking to people every day, iswhat is Russia's intent? Why are
they doing this? What's theirobjective and listening to you?
It sounds to me the objective isnot just to keep NATO from from
(13:02):
out of Ukraine, it really is agrander aspiration to try to
bring Ukraine back into theRussian boundaries into its own
nation.
Alex Vindman (13:15):
Absolutely. I think the NATO discussion is
mainly about the fact that NATOwas empowering and helping
Ukraine get stronger. And Russiawanted to limit NATO's ability
to do that. So this is allbefore the war. But clearly, you
know, all the indicators nowthere's it's indisputable that
Putin, his aspirations werealways for Ukraine, we're always
(13:38):
to fold Ukraine back in andeverything else was kind of a
pretext of sorts for war, sayingthat he had no choice because
NATO was expanding all thisother stuff. But it's always
been about Ukraine. He started awar in 2014. He thought he had
done enough damage, frankly,when he annexed Crimea. And when
he started a war in easternUkraine, to rescue Ukraine's
(13:59):
progress towards towards thewest, but in fact, he actually
accelerated it. He was agalvanizing force.
Dr. David Shulkin (14:05):
Yeah. So Alex, how does it work? If 90%
of the population votes to getaway from from from Russia and
the Soviet Union? How does heexpect to occupy a territory
where the people aren't going tobe supportive
Alex Vindman (14:24):
for the 1990s and 2000s, Ukraine was a basket case
they, frankly couldn't provideservices to all their people,
that the reforms that weresupposed to help them move
towards the west didn't kind ofcome through for what they did,
but not in a way that wassatisfying. And corruption was
was endemic. And you had thisdivide you still even within
(14:47):
this population, you still hadkind of an East West divide the
more Russian leaning portions ofthe country, more Western
leaning portions of the country.
But those slowly started to kindof blur through this period of
independence because everybody'slearning Korean language,
they're developing culturalidentity. And by Putin launching
this war in 2014, he took themost kind of racially pro
Russian portion of the countrytook it out. So now the rest of
(15:11):
the country kind of kind ofconsolidate with it with a clear
identity and a sense of self inand under the threat of Russian
war. And he's actually nudged itfurther away from Russian
Russia's control towards thewest. And he, where he's
initially thought he'd beensuccessful. He recognized that
he had, he had miscalculated,you need something bigger. And
(15:33):
that's why we have this massive,you know, Army sweeping in from
the north, east and south.
That's where he needed somethingbold like that to, to recapture
Ukraine, through military force
Louis Celli (15:47):
developments continue to unfold daily, can
you bring our listeners up todate as to where we are,
Alex Vindman (15:52):
you know, we are in a world where a week ago, it
looked like Russia was going toachieve its military aims and
democracy was going to be on itsheels, US was going to be in a
much much diminished a place inthe world, Europe was going to
be in a much diminished place inthe world and the subject of
(16:12):
great instability, Putin madesome major miscalculations, he's
basically galvanized the worldand supportive of Ukraine, he's
galvanized the democratic worldin opposition to him. And even
an even the kind of theambiguous parts of the globe
have now set made a choice aboutwhich kind of world they want to
(16:34):
live in rules of the jungleRussia, or kind of Western
democratic order. So those are,that's the kind of big sweep of
geopolitics. But we're now onthe cusp of Ukraine, frankly,
being in a place where itemerges with its sovereignty and
territorial integrity intact.
And with a much, much closerrelationship with, with the
European Union and, and with theWest, without having to
(16:58):
constantly fear for it safety.
We're in the span of seven days,in the force of arms, the
diligent, valiant defense of theUkrainian people in the
leadership of their presidentwho's more than a leader of
Ukraine, he's leader of the freeworld. We're living in a world
where, you know, this is one ofthe biggest battles for for
(17:20):
democracy. And there's a goodchance that, you know, we come
out okay.
Dr. David Shulkin (17:26):
Are you saying, Are you saying that
ultimately, Ukraine may end upbeing a member of NATO if all
this happens?
Alex Vindman (17:34):
Are you think NATO, I think visit or Ukrainian
joke that you might appreciatethat NATO could petition to join
Ukraine. They've got someswagger now. But I think there's
a good possibility that Ukrainegets a roadmap for the European
Union. That's what I think islikely.
Louis Celli (17:54):
So Lucas, Alpert, a reporter for The Wall Street
Journal wrote last week thatPutin's claim of reuniting
nationalism is really just acover for protecting Russia's
economic ability to provide fuelthrough Ukraine. And you've
given us a little bit about youropinion about, you know, about
what Vladimir Putin's real goalsare, but judging now based on
(18:15):
his own people who are, arewilling to go to jail so that
they can oppose him publicly?
What is what is the outcome looklike?
Alex Vindman (18:25):
It got worse than that today, people that, you
know, spread false information,whatever that means, could not
be sent to the front. That's theDuma pass the law, not today. So
what does the ultimate outcomelook like? So the President, or
a dictator, Putin bears a lot ofresponsibility for how poorly
(18:48):
This is gone. Because for thosethat understand the military,
they get their kind of theirdirection from a pie. They get,
you know, kind of, there aresome assumptions made about how
easy this is going to be thatthey're coming in with peace as
peacekeepers that the populationis going to run over. That
population is going to rollover. And the military plans
(19:09):
based on this assumption, so thepresident said some directions,
the military set up a plan,which is disastrous in
hindsight, because it wasprobably the worst possible
outcome the the Russians did notemploy their, their massive
capability with regards totechnology with regards to
fires. So they didn't destroythe Ukrainian Air force on the
ground. They didn't destroy theUkrainian air defense on the
(19:31):
ground where they can flyfreely. And then they rolled
forward to cities and gotbottled up in those cities and
started taking punishing losses.
And just as they were takingthose punishing losses, and they
were calling for fuel, food andammunition, those cowboys
started rolling through andgetting destroyed hammered by
the Ukrainians. So now you havea significantly diminished and
(19:52):
you know, pretty pretty chewedup Russian military in not just
any parts of the world. But theleading edge is the kind of the
most powerful parts of theformation. It's far from from
done. The Russians still have alot of combat power. But they
cannot this at this point theysimply cannot achieve their
military objectives. They themirage of rolling into a city,
(20:14):
removing a political leadershipleadership, putting in a puppet
and then leaving is gone.
Because we could we could weknow that Ukrainian people are
not going to tolerate it. So nowyou have to hold ground. And the
Ukrainians are not going toallow the Russians to hold
ground unpunished. So thatmilitary portion of the plan is
(20:35):
deeply flawed. The Russians aregoing through the routes and
they're using fires to just justdestroy cities. And I think this
is likely to play out as it isfor some time, unless we the
United States offer materialsupport. This is not troops on
the ground. This is not pilotsand planes. This is more air
defense. So these are theStingers these are the anti tank
(20:59):
javelins. And frankly, I thinkwe should be offering them, you
calves, which they're unmannedcombat aerial vehicles. So like
those Turkish TV twos, by ourcars, those that types of things
to destroy these missile systemsbefore they could wreck cities,
that's where we, that's how thisthing maybe gets wrapped up a
(21:20):
little bit quicker. Otherwise,as its as it goes on, and
spirals, and it gets moredangerous,
Dr. David Shulkin (21:25):
when you said some really scary things. But
you've also said some optimisticthings, in terms of the
Ukrainian resistance. Do youthink then that since the
Russians have gotten bogged downthat the threat to the other
European Union countries isreally now over? You know, the
United States has now sent90,000 troops over to Europe?
(21:50):
And certainly I think theconcern has been that Russia had
done well with their militaryincursion that potentially other
European nations are threatened.
But do you see that as lesslikely now?
Alex Vindman (22:03):
Yes, absolutely. I always thought it was not very
likely, because Article Five iskind of a high bar, I think it
would more be more than likely,more likely for some some sort
of long term provocation orattack if Russia was successful.
But not in the context of this.
I think you have a situation inwhich you have a situation in
which it was always far fetchedfor the Russians to try to
(22:28):
conventionally target, NATO andUS forces. I've been sat in the
room when conversations weregoing on when US are striking
targets, close to where theRussians were, and the Russians
were basically pleading, do notstrike, make sure we don't
receive any casualties, becausethen we'd be forced to respond.
But it was kind of like in theimpotent, please don't make us,
(22:50):
you know, put us in a positionwhere we have to defend
ourselves type of situation. Butthat was that was kind of like
anecdotal. Now, we see a Russianmilitary that's getting
trounced. I mean, it's still dayseven. But so far, it's gotten
really bad. There major gainshave been in the south. And
those have not been super, supergreat either. In the in the
(23:13):
eastern North, they've basicallystalled. So to for them to go
after NATO, or is conventionallyis unrealistic. But as this as
this spirals, though, if thisextends from from days into
weeks and months, and Putinfeels like he's backed into a
corner, and he does his typicalkind of double down incremental
(23:34):
ism, you have a scenario inwhich he, you know, is he
becomes more bold, especially ifhe's unchecked, which is the
pattern that brought us to this,this computation in the first
place. He was he's just beenchecked for a long time and
believed he could act withimpunity. And in that kind of
situation, there's a risk thatyou know, he crosses a threshold
(23:55):
and then a NATO forces areinvolved in that could lead to a
bigger spiral.
Louis Celli (24:02):
This might be a good time in the in the podcast
for you to to help our listenersunderstand who may not have been
following national securityissues in the past, just who
Alex vindman is how you gothere. And you know, how you
became such an expert at this.
Alex Vindman (24:16):
So I'm now a retired Army officer. I started
my career as an infantryman, sotroop leader for for about a
decade, did all that kind ofcool stuff, Airborne Ranger and
all that stuff. And then I andthen I went off and kind of had
to do some introspection andthink about where I could make
(24:37):
the biggest contribution. And Ispoke Russian. Because I spoke
it in the home. My family cameover to the US when I was we
arrived here when I was aboutfour years old from and from
Kiev, from Kiev, Ukraine. So Iunderstand the language I
understand the culture and thenas a foreign area officer, I
went in received advancedtraining I went to Harvard for
(24:59):
graduate school I served inUkraine for a year, I traveled
all over the place there. Andthen actually all throughout the
former Soviet Union, like so,one corner to the other, you
know, these boonies in themiddle of Siberia and stuff,
stuff like that included. Andthen I served for three years in
Moscow. And I served part ofthat time after Russia started
(25:20):
its war in 2014. And basically,had underground ground
experience understanding how theRussians were conducting the
war, I was asked to join the Iwas asked by I was directed to
join the Pentagon. And in thePentagon, I authored the
national military strategy forRussia. So the plan of how we're
going to manage Russia,belligerent Russia, and then
(25:42):
participating in all of that, inall these, like four star level
engagements, you know, managingthe chairman's affairs with
Russia, including all themeetings he had with Grace
mouth, and translating for thecalls when cruise missiles are
flying into, into Syria, withRussians on the you know, these
air bases, I was asked to jointhe White House, and to be
(26:04):
responsible for Russia,initially, and then eventually
Ukraine, and a bunch of othercountries. So as the director
for Eastern European directorfor European affairs, and yeah,
and then history unfolded.
Dr. David Shulkin (26:17):
And so So given that, that perspective,
which I think is justremarkable, and you know, you're
the perfect person for beingable to help us think through
this. How do you think the US isusing the balance of, you know,
focusing now on sanctionsprimarily, are the sanctions
(26:39):
impacting and being effectiveor, or understanding the Russian
psychology and understandingPutin? Do you think that he just
is not going to respond tosanctions?
Alex Vindman (26:49):
Well, there's a lot of stuff that has unfolded
over the course of the past weekthat nobody expected, nobody
really could could haveunderstood that the Ukrainians
were gonna hold the way theydid, I mean, like unbending
steel, and setting theconditions really for the rest
(27:12):
of the world to rally aroundthem with the sanctions and
including going after Russia'scentral bank. And this, this,
this funding of $640 billion,which is basically evaporated,
because they're cut off from it.
And all of the businesses thatare leaving, you know, central
to Russia's economy, like theoil and gas sector, technology
(27:33):
firms. So the sanctions all kindof unfolded after which was one
thing that was critical of thisadministration of I thought we
should employ graduated responseoptions to deter the war,
instead of waiting until afterit happened. And then, you know,
punish, never really the bestidea, because the Russians will
kind of tend to double down, youwant to signal and you want to
(27:56):
start to kind of ratchet up andmake sure that your signals,
they know that the signals aremore than signals, they're
meaningful. But sections areintended to have an effect over
the course of weeks and months,not days, weeks, months and
years, not days. So this ismainly punitive. And these
things will start to, to reallyRoyall the population in Russia,
which is already discontent withthe warm because they were out
(28:21):
in the streets before thesanctions were levied. And that
was before the Russians startedtaking severe combat losses by
by Ukrainian account, which isprobably, if it's inflated, it's
inflated, because if the sameway that US forces would double
count, because you know, you'llhave multiple units maybe
claimed the same destroyed tankor something like that. But if
(28:42):
it's if the numbers are vast,over 9000, Russian dead, these
punishing strikes on thelogistics and so forth, and
destruction of Russian frontlineunits. That is not something
that Putin counted on. Andthat's not something that the
Russians were expecting, theywere expecting a peacekeeping
operation, or limited operationto secure that these so called,
(29:05):
you know, Donetsk and Luhansk.
republics, which are, which iswhich don't exist, they were
Russian controlled territory. Sonow those things are going to
unfold. And it's really, reallygoing to cause a lot of, it's
going to cause a lot of unrestinside Russia that they're gonna
(29:25):
have to deal
Dr. David Shulkin (29:26):
with. I wanted to just switch the topic
just for one second, to get yourperspective on this. And that is
about the psychology of theAmerican people watching this on
their TVs. You know, we justwatched this horrific withdrawal
from Afghanistan. And, you know,it looked like the US was
(29:48):
finally out of conflicts andthat and that maybe the military
and veterans who are going totake a back seat, but I just
wonder what your what yourfeeling is, do you think that
the American public looks at ourmilitary now as having to remain
strong. And this is the reasonwhy we can never let our guard
(30:10):
down. Because while theredoesn't appear to be a threat
one day, it can appearovernight. Like what happened
here with Ukraine? Do you thinkthat this is going to impact the
way that Americans feel aboutour military and our veterans?
Alex Vindman (30:24):
I? Absolutely. So I think you know, we do not have
the luxury of letting our guarddown, we do not have the luxury
of receding back in retrenchingto our shores. This is the this
is a fundamental flaw to AmericaFirst policy is that somehow the
rest of the world? Well, youknow, the rest of the world
doesn't affect us. It does it.
And what we do also affects therest of the world. So, you know,
(30:45):
when our politicians make somepronouncements here or take
actions here, it doesn't justaffect domestic politics, it
affects the rest of the world.
And it gives Vladimir Putin agreen light to conduct his
military operation because hethinks the US is distracted or
divided, or that, you know, oneof the political parties is
going to take it easy on him,these things matter, we should
(31:08):
we forgotten our central placein the world. For whatever
reason, it's, you know, we'restill the sole superpower, we've
forgotten our place in theworld. You know, too much navel
gazing too much focus on thingsthat, frankly, that the
Ukrainians have probably wokenus up to, that there are real
struggles there. They're realchallenges, that they're real
(31:29):
threats. And I think ifanything, I actually see it
bringing us population togetherin a way that I haven't seen,
you know, not since September11. Certainly, January, six
people hoped that it would kindof bring the population together
didn't, because it fed the beaston on the big lie, but this is
seems to be bringing thepopulation together. So I'm
(31:50):
gonna be a little hopeful about
Louis Celli (31:51):
that. So I want to go back to something you said
earlier about sanctions. Andthis this unprovoked attack has
caused this conversation to cometo the forefront for the
American people. But America hascome to associate Russia with a
high degree of organized crime.
I mean, especially cybercrime,which really changes the
dynamics now, because criminalactivity isn't restricted to
just Russian homeland threats.
(32:12):
And the threats are now third,global menace. So this this war
aside, how does theinternational community police
this now that now that we'veseen this unfold?
Alex Vindman (32:23):
Well, one thing we could say is that Russia is
going to be greatly diminishedcoming out of this? Russia's
belligerents. I mean, it could,there's only so many times they
could try to do that the nuclearsaber rattling to intimidate us
before we like, Okay, be quiet,you cried wolf too many times.
And we know that's somethingthat he's going to because his
(32:44):
army is diminishing, that kindof boogeyman of conventional
forces and isn't there, he'sgoing to probably want to be or
whoever follows him is going tobe want to be very careful with
the saber rattling on thenuclear side. Because otherwise,
that will also be no longeruseful. It'll be diminished, as
as irrelevant. So I think weprobably will see a Russia, we
(33:06):
could end up with a Russia thatactually takes a healthy dose of
reality, and recognizes thatit's not the Soviet Union, that
the exceptionalism of the SovietUnion and having influence over,
you know, Eurasia is was amirage that let it down the
primrose path towards failure,and that they they undertake,
(33:27):
you know, really structuralreforms that that they need to
do internally, that actuallycould end up being that is not
as far fetched as it would havebeen to say that a week ago. But
the way this has unfolded hasbeen, it's been it's been pretty
darn bad. And that's not just onthe battlefields. That's just
from every element,informational, military,
(33:48):
economic, and diplomatic,political.
Louis Celli (33:52):
I'm really glad you brought up the Eurasia point,
because there's been a lot ofdiscussion lately about whether
whether Vladimir Putin has beenbolstered by President G in, you
know, in with China, and youknow, whether he has his back,
and we're I think we're seeingnow that this type of behavior,
this type of attack on humanrights, just isn't going to be
(34:15):
tolerated by the globalcommunity anymore, regardless of
who commits it. So this may havegiven states that the do these
types of things cause for pauseit, what are you seeing?
Alex Vindman (34:29):
I think that's a very astute analysis, I think I
feared that there would be achilling effect on democracy if
Ukraine was crushed, and therewas a timid response from the
west. But this powerful powerfulresponse from Ukraine setting
conditions for all this we therethat we should recognize who the
(34:50):
heroes are, but the Ukrainiansetting the conditions for this
have allowed democracy to rallyand we're in a world where
frankly, it's it's it's acautionary tale for
authoritarianism and overreachand the thing the fears that we
had about, you know, a Taiwanscenario are diminished now.
Because we could count on therest of the world being there.
(35:12):
And the fears that we had aboutkind of resurgent
authoritarianism andconsolidation are now frankly,
you know, a little bit easierthan they were, we still have a
lot of great dangers. I mean,you know, a cornered Russia that
feels it's under existentialthreat does have the most
(35:33):
powerful, the second mostpowerful nuclear arsenal in the
world, and we need to be on ourguard. But we should not we
should now be feeling our power,as democracies and living up to
kind of our own values and ourown aspirations, without
thinking second guessingourselves constantly. Colonel
Louis Celli (35:51):
Viman, we're just about out of time. But before we
go, take us through this. Howdoes this end? What does this
look like, give us give us yourprediction, on, on what we what
we might be able to expect onhow this ends,
Alex Vindman (36:03):
it likely ends with a great deal of tragedy,
but it does end it's it endswith Ukraine, or maintaining
sovereignty and independence.
That's one thing that's prettyclear. It ends with a greatly
diminished Russia and ends witha greatly diminished Putin. But
the scenario is the two kind ofmain, you know, directions are,
it ends relatively quickly,because Ukraine gets the aid it
(36:25):
needs and is able to reformat,Putin's thinking on on the
military in the ability to usethese punishing fires to destroy
cities, or extends for a longperiod of time. And it becomes
increasingly escalatory. Andthere's the possibility of for
the US being drawn in. And youhave a scenario in which you
(36:47):
know that we avoid that. But ifthere's a catastrophic loss for
Ukraine, but ultimately, I thinkyou Russia leaves Ukraine, after
wrecking cities, and saying thatthey successfully completed
their demilitarization do notsuffocation by force, even
though you know, we areUkrainian showed them up.
(37:09):
They'll just say that becausePutin could say that he's an
authoritarian, he could just sayI was successful, taking my
armies and going home, but he'she's inflicted a massive amount
of damage. The thing is thatthis is one shot, he blew it. He
no longer has. Ukraine no longerreally has to fear a threat of
Russia doing this again, becauseof how bloody is how badly
(37:32):
Russia has been bloodied. AndUkraine that gets rebuilt on the
back end of this is much morepowerful, much more capable to
face down future challenges.
Dr. David Shulkin (37:45):
We are running out of time, but two
quick questions if you couldanswer them, you know, rapidly.
First of all, what what is thechance of what is the scenario
that you would see that theUnited States gets drawn into
this militarily?
Alex Vindman (37:59):
It's it's hard to say what that what that looks
like, exactly, but it's probablya human disaster, you know, with
with just like a nightmare, likethe bombing of the the market in
Sarajevo or something of thatnature, galvanizing moment like
that, that the Russians are allabout certain to inflict, you
(38:23):
know, a errant missile thattakes down another airline or
something of that nature, wherewe have to move towards this is
why the options are a lot, a lotworse inside conflict than they
were outside to try to determineare we just didn't you know,
frankly, we didn't do enough.
Dr. David Shulkin (38:40):
And, and the last question, which I just have
to ask you, but being beingJewish, what is this that Putin
is talking about this notsuffocation? D not suffocation
when you have a Jewish Presidentof the Ukraine? And so can you
(39:00):
help? Can you help us understandthis a little bit better?
Alex Vindman (39:04):
Yeah, it's it's pretty absurd. Basically, you
know, when when Alinsky came topower, he was the only he had
actually a Jewish PrimeMinister. There was only one
other country in the world,Israel as a Jewish president and
Jewish Prime Minister. So it'sit's just kind of an absurd
throwback to what the Russianswould kind of call the
(39:26):
Ukrainians whenever they actedup the button data to because
the there were Ultranationalists during the Second
World War, fighting for freedomthat sided with the Nazis and
were complicit to some of theatrocities but this was a
country that was fighting forits freedom. And, you know, went
to horrible lengths to try toassure its freedom. So, I will
(39:52):
say that, you know, PresidentSolinsky has done us proud. He's
a Jewish Ukrainian guy. I'm aJewish Ukrainian guy. Our he's
one of our own. We're we're ahot commodity right now.
Louis Celli (40:06):
One. One final thing I'd like to end on this
before we go. One of the thingsyou said was it Putin took a
shot. And I think I think we'rea different society than we were
80 years ago between theinternet and the way information
travels the way the family's hasbeen, have been dispersed. So we
once you once, once the genie isout of the bottle on freedom and
(40:26):
democracy, it's hard to put thatback in. Where do you see where
do you see his vision on tryingto trying to conquer Europe?
Alex Vindman (40:35):
Putin's vision trying to conquer Europe, right?
In the toilet.
Dr. David Shulkin (40:39):
A good way to end.
Louis Celli (40:40):
Thank you so much for joining us.
Alex Vindman (40:43):
All right, thank you had a good time. Thanks for
your time to that. Okay.
Louis Celli (40:48):
And that really is all the time that we have for
this week. And we really want tothank our listeners for making
us one of the most listened topodcasts in the nonprofit space
on iTunes. It really is quite anaccomplishment. We will see you
next week.
Charlie Malone (41:05):
Thanks for listening to the policy bits
podcasts. For more informationabout projects and other
podcasts. Go to policy. That'sdot org.
Putin's aspirations were always for
Ukraine were always to foldUkraine back in, and everything
else was kind of a pretext ofsorts for war, saying that he
had no choice because NATO wasexpanding all this other stuff.
But it's always been aboutUkraine. He started a war in
2014. He thought he had doneenough damage, frankly, when he
annexed Crimea. And when hestarted a war in eastern Ukraine
(00:24):
to rescue Ukraine's progresstowards towards the west, but in
fact, he actually acceleratedit. He was a galvanizing force.
Charlie Malone (00:36):
Welcome to Season Two of the policy bets
podcast, engaging with leaders,scholars and strong voices to
fill a void in support of PolicyDevelopment for America's
veterans. With your host formerSecretary of Veterans Affairs,
Dr. David Shulkin. And theExecutive Director of Policy
beds, Louis Celli, today's guestLieutenant Colonel Alexander
(00:56):
vindman, a retired United StatesArmy officer and former director
for European Affairs for the USNational Security Council.
Louis Celli (01:06):
Well, Mr.
Secretary, here we arewitnessing the first full scale
invasion of a European nation byanother in over 80 years. I
mean, it's truly sad for thepeople, Ukraine and democracy
overall.
Dr. David Shulkin (01:18):
Yeah, it certainly is. But, you know, I
think that even watching thetragedy unfold, and who knows
what the future is gonna hold.
There still are some reallyhopeful signs coming out of
Ukraine, and also some importantlessons for the world to see how
to respond to military invasionslike this. Well, global
Louis Celli (01:42):
politics is a lot to follow. And, you know, while
wars and fighting in Asia arebrought to the attention of the
American public, largely throughAmerican involvement, or through
the reporting of outrageoushuman, human rights violations,
European politics feels muchmore intimate. I mean, for
instance, Brexit was closelycovered here in the United
States, and the royal family isin the news daily. I don't think
(02:05):
there's anyone that doesn't knowthat the Queen has COVID.
Dr. David Shulkin (02:09):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's true. And it is
amazing watching this play outin front of our eyes. I think
we're really lucky today to haveColonel vindman, to talk to us
about how to understand whatwe're seeing both in terms of
not only the historical and thestrategic issues that we're
(02:30):
watching, but also watching thisunfold so quickly, and how to
interpret the events, and howit's likely to impact the
future, this is really going tobe an important podcast.
Louis Celli (02:42):
I couldn't agree more. I was stationed in Germany
twice during my military career,once at the height of the Cold
War. And then again, at thecollapse of the Soviet Union, as
matter of fact, I was in Berlinwhen the wall came down. And,
you know, I was one of the firstAmerican soldiers to interact
with a foreign East Germansoldier. So I've seen firsthand
the difference between a freemarket economy and what a
(03:03):
communist economy looks like.
Yeah,
Dr. David Shulkin (03:05):
and glue. I think it's so important that you
talk about that, because manyAmericans, and I certainly hear
this all the time you say, Idon't understand why we are have
our troops over in Europe, inKorea, all over the world. Why
are we doing that? Those wereold times? You know, that was
World War Two. But I think thisallows Americans to understand
(03:31):
why it's important that Americamaintains its strength in its
world leadership position,because who just a few months
ago would have really everimagined that we'd be in this
situation today.
Louis Celli (03:45):
It's absolutely right. And here's the
difference. You know, once asociety has lived in a free and
democratic economy, I don'tthink it's possible to go back.
I just I don't see how that'spossible.
Dr. David Shulkin (03:58):
Well, the way it's possible is through lots of
human tragedy and a lot ofsuffering. And you know,
certainly people aren't going todo it under their free will. And
so, so we're watching this asthe Braves Ukrainians stand up
to this tyranny right now. Andlet's, let's hope that the
ending to this is one that wecan all feel was worth it,
(04:24):
because there's going to be alot of people that suffer in the
meantime.
Louis Celli (04:28):
It's true. The only other example we have of
anything like this in our time,is when Hong Kong was turned
back over from the British toChina to Chinese rule, and that
was through a treaty. So I mean,that was and not only that Hong
Kong is different. They'reisolated, they're an island. So
the last time that an invasionlike this was successful, was
during the dawn of theinformation age, when radio and
(04:50):
printed newspaper were the onlymedia available that was the
only the only voice that peopleheard.
Dr. David Shulkin (04:56):
Well, I also think we saw something similar
with the talent band though. Butagain, that was a that was an
intra country conflict and, youknow, somewhat tribal in nature.
And this one's different this isthis is breaking across, you
know, internationally acceptedboundaries. And so we'll, we'll
(05:18):
need to see exactly where thisgoes. But I think what's so
interesting about our podcastguest today is is that he not
only is able to interpret what'shappening through a historical
lens, he's able to go out andtalk about where he thinks this
is going to end and what itmeans for the future
relationships between Europe,the United States and Russia.
Louis Celli (05:41):
It's absolutely true. And, you know, I think
what we may hear is that, youknow, Vladimir Putin had
severely miscalculated the humanresolve of the Ukrainian people,
as we're seeing play out on thenews today, and Ukrainian
president Solinsky has basicallyturned into an international
folk hero, you know, which onlyserved to strengthen the resolve
(06:04):
of the overwhelminginternational disdain for
Russian aggression.
Dr. David Shulkin (06:09):
Yeah, I think that's an accurate reflection of
today's picture, but never ontheir estimate. Lattimer Putin,
he, he's been doing this a longtime, he has a pretty good sense
of what is still left for him interms of, you know, tricks up
(06:29):
his sleeve, as well as hissignificant military power. So
no one should be overconfidentin where we are today.
Louis Celli (06:39):
Well, I really can't wait to get Lieutenant
Colonel vindman. In here. Hewas, as you know, born in
Ukraine, he immigrated to theUnited States as a child ended
up working at the White House,you know, the director of
European Affairs for theNational Security Council, and
he's a regular commentator onCNN and MSNBC. So we're lucky to
have him today.
Dr. David Shulkin (06:57):
Yep. So let's, let's hear what he has to
say.
Louis Celli (07:08):
Lieutenant Colonel vindman, thank you for making
time to join us today at thepositive. That's podcast, we
really appreciate it.
Unknown (07:13):
Thank you for having me on.
Dr. David Shulkin (07:15):
Colonel, I wanted to get right into some of
the current events that arehappening in the Ukraine today
in terms of both how ourlisteners should think about
what's happening bothhistorically, but also
strategically, in terms of whatthey're watching. And actually
(07:35):
you helping them understand iton CNN, and lots of other
outlets, I'm sure. But give usyour sense where things are
today.
Alex Vindman (07:44):
Yeah. So I mean, those are fundamental questions
on how we got here. And thatcould be in the big scale.
Because the shared historybetween Russia and Ukraine and
their predecessors, goes back1000 years. And for somebody
like Vladimir Putin, he, hethinks about long term
(08:06):
historical legacies. And hethinks about the fact that
Russia and Ukraine areindivisible, and that Ukraine is
a part of Russia. And what wasknown as you had greater Russia,
which is a Russian Empire,little Russia was Ukraine and
Belarus. Those are the three thecore of the Empire. That's the
way he sees the world. They dothey they're constantly intermix
(08:28):
in constant interaction betweenthese populations and these
people. But there's also apersistent feature of struggle
for self determinationindependence on initially it was
from Russia and from Muscovy,away from the the Kiev and
rousse princely states whereKiev is the capital of Ukraine,
but when it was founded a longtime ago is the dominant power
(08:51):
was Keven rousse and then afterthe Mongol hordes sacked the
city and depopulated it andallowed for the, for the
predecessor to, to Russia tostart to, to merge and
consolidate and they emerged asa power of vassal power of the
Mongol horde. And slowly butsurely this you know, what used
(09:13):
to be the lesser became thegreater and slowly started to
dominate the region. Much of themodern history, if we could call
it that goes back to about the17th century where the
Ukrainians were trying to pavetheir own way as an independent
country and made the illconceived decision to partner
(09:37):
with Russia, when they weretrying to establish their
independence from Poland andLithuania, this there was a
Polish Lithuanian Commonwealthand the Ottoman Empire and so
forth. And Russia took that aslicense to slowly kind of assert
dominance, but that was over allof Ukraine. That was all over
eastern Ukraine. And by the timeyou get to you jump forward to
(09:58):
the 19th and 20th centurythere's kind of a firm movement
for Ukrainian identity. There isa Ukrainian renaissance in terms
of language, in terms ofculture, poetry and things of
that nature in a brief period ofindependence in the 20th
century, after the collapse ofthe Russian Empire, and the Red
Army crushes that prettyquickly, and it still is not the
(10:20):
entirety of Ukraine, because theWestern ports that are creating
Alicia or Alicia were part ofthe Austro Hungarian empire and
then part of Poland. And it'snot really until after you get
to World War Two, that thecountry takes shape as it looks
like now. And after World WarTwo acquires the the territory
(10:41):
of Crimea. Now, the reason thatPutin claims you know, that
they're this is one one peopleis that there was a Russian
chauvinism, a deep Russianchauvinism over a dominance over
other kinds of Slavicpopulations. And there's an
animist because Ukraine was bothresponsible for the creation of
(11:06):
the Soviet Union, how it looked,why it was 15 states, because
there was a discussion at onepoint about establishing a
communist Russian Empire. ButUkraine's demands for for kind
of autonomy for a recognition asa separate population, as well
as Georgia has forced the forcedLenin to accept 15 different
(11:26):
states. And as much as that wasUkraine, that was the kind of
the genesis for the SovietUnion. It was also the genesis
for the collapse of the SovietUnion, because on December
1 1991, the Ukrainian populationvoted overwhelmingly 90% voted
for independence. And withoutUkraine, there was no ability to
(11:49):
sustain the Soviet Union,Yeltsin, Gorbachev and Yeltsin.
In particular, Yeltsin goes onthe record and saying, I'm not
going to try to establish aunion without Ukraine, because
then we'd be dominated by, youknow, non white Russians and
stuff like that. So Putinunderstands this, he either he's
got a grievance there, thatUkraine was responsible for the
(12:10):
greatest tragedy of the20th 20th century. And for the
entirety of the post Sovietperiod, Russia has been trying
to assert control over Ukraine,and assert, initially with
economic levers, because therewere plenty of them, Ukraine and
Russia were tied and everythingkind of felt toward, went
towards the center of Moscow.
And then once that once, hecouldn't do that with with
(12:33):
military force. And that's theprecursor to this now.
Dr. David Shulkin (12:38):
So Alex, all that history is really important
and relevant. And I think thebiggest question that I hear in
talking to people every day, iswhat is Russia's intent? Why are
they doing this? What's theirobjective and listening to you?
It sounds to me the objective isnot just to keep NATO from from
(13:02):
out of Ukraine, it really is agrander aspiration to try to
bring Ukraine back into theRussian boundaries into its own
nation.
Alex Vindman (13:15):
Absolutely. I think the NATO discussion is
mainly about the fact that NATOwas empowering and helping
Ukraine get stronger. And Russiawanted to limit NATO's ability
to do that. So this is allbefore the war. But clearly, you
know, all the indicators nowthere's it's indisputable that
Putin, his aspirations werealways for Ukraine, we're always
(13:38):
to fold Ukraine back in andeverything else was kind of a
pretext of sorts for war, sayingthat he had no choice because
NATO was expanding all thisother stuff. But it's always
been about Ukraine. He started awar in 2014. He thought he had
done enough damage, frankly,when he annexed Crimea. And when
he started a war in easternUkraine, to rescue Ukraine's
(13:59):
progress towards towards thewest, but in fact, he actually
accelerated it. He was agalvanizing force.
Dr. David Shulkin (14:05):
Yeah. So Alex, how does it work? If 90%
of the population votes to getaway from from from Russia and
the Soviet Union? How does heexpect to occupy a territory
where the people aren't going tobe supportive
Alex Vindman (14:24):
for the 1990s and 2000s, Ukraine was a basket case
they, frankly couldn't provideservices to all their people,
that the reforms that weresupposed to help them move
towards the west didn't kind ofcome through for what they did,
but not in a way that wassatisfying. And corruption was
was endemic. And you had thisdivide you still even within
(14:47):
this population, you still hadkind of an East West divide the
more Russian leaning portions ofthe country, more Western
leaning portions of the country.
But those slowly started to kindof blur through this period of
independence because everybody'slearning Korean language,
they're developing culturalidentity. And by Putin launching
this war in 2014, he took themost kind of racially pro
Russian portion of the countrytook it out. So now the rest of
(15:11):
the country kind of kind ofconsolidate with it with a clear
identity and a sense of self inand under the threat of Russian
war. And he's actually nudged itfurther away from Russian
Russia's control towards thewest. And he, where he's
initially thought he'd beensuccessful. He recognized that
he had, he had miscalculated,you need something bigger. And
(15:33):
that's why we have this massive,you know, Army sweeping in from
the north, east and south.
That's where he needed somethingbold like that to, to recapture
Ukraine, through military force
Louis Celli (15:47):
developments continue to unfold daily, can
you bring our listeners up todate as to where we are,
Alex Vindman (15:52):
you know, we are in a world where a week ago, it
looked like Russia was going toachieve its military aims and
democracy was going to be on itsheels, US was going to be in a
much much diminished a place inthe world, Europe was going to
be in a much diminished place inthe world and the subject of
(16:12):
great instability, Putin madesome major miscalculations, he's
basically galvanized the worldand supportive of Ukraine, he's
galvanized the democratic worldin opposition to him. And even
an even the kind of theambiguous parts of the globe
have now set made a choice aboutwhich kind of world they want to
(16:34):
live in rules of the jungleRussia, or kind of Western
democratic order. So those are,that's the kind of big sweep of
geopolitics. But we're now onthe cusp of Ukraine, frankly,
being in a place where itemerges with its sovereignty and
territorial integrity intact.
And with a much, much closerrelationship with, with the
European Union and, and with theWest, without having to
(16:58):
constantly fear for it safety.
We're in the span of seven days,in the force of arms, the
diligent, valiant defense of theUkrainian people in the
leadership of their presidentwho's more than a leader of
Ukraine, he's leader of the freeworld. We're living in a world
where, you know, this is one ofthe biggest battles for for
(17:20):
democracy. And there's a goodchance that, you know, we come
out okay.
Dr. David Shulkin (17:26):
Are you saying, Are you saying that
ultimately, Ukraine may end upbeing a member of NATO if all
this happens?
Alex Vindman (17:34):
Are you think NATO, I think visit or Ukrainian
joke that you might appreciatethat NATO could petition to join
Ukraine. They've got someswagger now. But I think there's
a good possibility that Ukrainegets a roadmap for the European
Union. That's what I think islikely.
Louis Celli (17:54):
So Lucas, Alpert, a reporter for The Wall Street
Journal wrote last week thatPutin's claim of reuniting
nationalism is really just acover for protecting Russia's
economic ability to provide fuelthrough Ukraine. And you've
given us a little bit about youropinion about, you know, about
what Vladimir Putin's real goalsare, but judging now based on
(18:15):
his own people who are, arewilling to go to jail so that
they can oppose him publicly?
What is what is the outcome looklike?
Alex Vindman (18:25):
It got worse than that today, people that, you
know, spread false information,whatever that means, could not
be sent to the front. That's theDuma pass the law, not today. So
what does the ultimate outcomelook like? So the President, or
a dictator, Putin bears a lot ofresponsibility for how poorly
(18:48):
This is gone. Because for thosethat understand the military,
they get their kind of theirdirection from a pie. They get,
you know, kind of, there aresome assumptions made about how
easy this is going to be thatthey're coming in with peace as
peacekeepers that the populationis going to run over. That
population is going to rollover. And the military plans
(19:09):
based on this assumption, so thepresident said some directions,
the military set up a plan,which is disastrous in
hindsight, because it wasprobably the worst possible
outcome the the Russians did notemploy their, their massive
capability with regards totechnology with regards to
fires. So they didn't destroythe Ukrainian Air force on the
ground. They didn't destroy theUkrainian air defense on the
(19:31):
ground where they can flyfreely. And then they rolled
forward to cities and gotbottled up in those cities and
started taking punishing losses.
And just as they were takingthose punishing losses, and they
were calling for fuel, food andammunition, those cowboys
started rolling through andgetting destroyed hammered by
the Ukrainians. So now you havea significantly diminished and
(19:52):
you know, pretty pretty chewedup Russian military in not just
any parts of the world. But theleading edge is the kind of the
most powerful parts of theformation. It's far from from
done. The Russians still have alot of combat power. But they
cannot this at this point theysimply cannot achieve their
military objectives. They themirage of rolling into a city,
(20:14):
removing a political leadershipleadership, putting in a puppet
and then leaving is gone.
Because we could we could weknow that Ukrainian people are
not going to tolerate it. So nowyou have to hold ground. And the
Ukrainians are not going toallow the Russians to hold
ground unpunished. So thatmilitary portion of the plan is
(20:35):
deeply flawed. The Russians aregoing through the routes and
they're using fires to just justdestroy cities. And I think this
is likely to play out as it isfor some time, unless we the
United States offer materialsupport. This is not troops on
the ground. This is not pilotsand planes. This is more air
defense. So these are theStingers these are the anti tank
(20:59):
javelins. And frankly, I thinkwe should be offering them, you
calves, which they're unmannedcombat aerial vehicles. So like
those Turkish TV twos, by ourcars, those that types of things
to destroy these missile systemsbefore they could wreck cities,
that's where we, that's how thisthing maybe gets wrapped up a
(21:20):
little bit quicker. Otherwise,as its as it goes on, and
spirals, and it gets moredangerous,
Dr. David Shulkin (21:25):
when you said some really scary things. But
you've also said some optimisticthings, in terms of the
Ukrainian resistance. Do youthink then that since the
Russians have gotten bogged downthat the threat to the other
European Union countries isreally now over? You know, the
United States has now sent90,000 troops over to Europe?
(21:50):
And certainly I think theconcern has been that Russia had
done well with their militaryincursion that potentially other
European nations are threatened.
But do you see that as lesslikely now?
Alex Vindman (22:03):
Yes, absolutely. I always thought it was not very
likely, because Article Five iskind of a high bar, I think it
would more be more than likely,more likely for some some sort
of long term provocation orattack if Russia was successful.
But not in the context of this.
I think you have a situation inwhich you have a situation in
which it was always far fetchedfor the Russians to try to
(22:28):
conventionally target, NATO andUS forces. I've been sat in the
room when conversations weregoing on when US are striking
targets, close to where theRussians were, and the Russians
were basically pleading, do notstrike, make sure we don't
receive any casualties, becausethen we'd be forced to respond.
But it was kind of like in theimpotent, please don't make us,
(22:50):
you know, put us in a positionwhere we have to defend
ourselves type of situation. Butthat was that was kind of like
anecdotal. Now, we see a Russianmilitary that's getting
trounced. I mean, it's still dayseven. But so far, it's gotten
really bad. There major gainshave been in the south. And
those have not been super, supergreat either. In the in the
(23:13):
eastern North, they've basicallystalled. So to for them to go
after NATO, or is conventionallyis unrealistic. But as this as
this spirals, though, if thisextends from from days into
weeks and months, and Putinfeels like he's backed into a
corner, and he does his typicalkind of double down incremental
(23:34):
ism, you have a scenario inwhich he, you know, is he
becomes more bold, especially ifhe's unchecked, which is the
pattern that brought us to this,this computation in the first
place. He was he's just beenchecked for a long time and
believed he could act withimpunity. And in that kind of
situation, there's a risk thatyou know, he crosses a threshold
(23:55):
and then a NATO forces areinvolved in that could lead to a
bigger spiral.
Louis Celli (24:02):
This might be a good time in the in the podcast
for you to to help our listenersunderstand who may not have been
following national securityissues in the past, just who
Alex vindman is how you gothere. And you know, how you
became such an expert at this.
Alex Vindman (24:16):
So I'm now a retired Army officer. I started
my career as an infantryman, sotroop leader for for about a
decade, did all that kind ofcool stuff, Airborne Ranger and
all that stuff. And then I andthen I went off and kind of had
to do some introspection andthink about where I could make
(24:37):
the biggest contribution. And Ispoke Russian. Because I spoke
it in the home. My family cameover to the US when I was we
arrived here when I was aboutfour years old from and from
Kiev, from Kiev, Ukraine. So Iunderstand the language I
understand the culture and thenas a foreign area officer, I
went in received advancedtraining I went to Harvard for
(24:59):
graduate school I served inUkraine for a year, I traveled
all over the place there. Andthen actually all throughout the
former Soviet Union, like so,one corner to the other, you
know, these boonies in themiddle of Siberia and stuff,
stuff like that included. Andthen I served for three years in
Moscow. And I served part ofthat time after Russia started
(25:20):
its war in 2014. And basically,had underground ground
experience understanding how theRussians were conducting the
war, I was asked to join the Iwas asked by I was directed to
join the Pentagon. And in thePentagon, I authored the
national military strategy forRussia. So the plan of how we're
going to manage Russia,belligerent Russia, and then
(25:42):
participating in all of that, inall these, like four star level
engagements, you know, managingthe chairman's affairs with
Russia, including all themeetings he had with Grace
mouth, and translating for thecalls when cruise missiles are
flying into, into Syria, withRussians on the you know, these
air bases, I was asked to jointhe White House, and to be
(26:04):
responsible for Russia,initially, and then eventually
Ukraine, and a bunch of othercountries. So as the director
for Eastern European directorfor European affairs, and yeah,
and then history unfolded.
Dr. David Shulkin (26:17):
And so So given that, that perspective,
which I think is justremarkable, and you know, you're
the perfect person for beingable to help us think through
this. How do you think the US isusing the balance of, you know,
focusing now on sanctionsprimarily, are the sanctions
(26:39):
impacting and being effectiveor, or understanding the Russian
psychology and understandingPutin? Do you think that he just
is not going to respond tosanctions?
Alex Vindman (26:49):
Well, there's a lot of stuff that has unfolded
over the course of the past weekthat nobody expected, nobody
really could could haveunderstood that the Ukrainians
were gonna hold the way theydid, I mean, like unbending
steel, and setting theconditions really for the rest
(27:12):
of the world to rally aroundthem with the sanctions and
including going after Russia'scentral bank. And this, this,
this funding of $640 billion,which is basically evaporated,
because they're cut off from it.
And all of the businesses thatare leaving, you know, central
to Russia's economy, like theoil and gas sector, technology
(27:33):
firms. So the sanctions all kindof unfolded after which was one
thing that was critical of thisadministration of I thought we
should employ graduated responseoptions to deter the war,
instead of waiting until afterit happened. And then, you know,
punish, never really the bestidea, because the Russians will
kind of tend to double down, youwant to signal and you want to
(27:56):
start to kind of ratchet up andmake sure that your signals,
they know that the signals aremore than signals, they're
meaningful. But sections areintended to have an effect over
the course of weeks and months,not days, weeks, months and
years, not days. So this ismainly punitive. And these
things will start to, to reallyRoyall the population in Russia,
which is already discontent withthe warm because they were out
(28:21):
in the streets before thesanctions were levied. And that
was before the Russians startedtaking severe combat losses by
by Ukrainian account, which isprobably, if it's inflated, it's
inflated, because if the sameway that US forces would double
count, because you know, you'llhave multiple units maybe
claimed the same destroyed tankor something like that. But if
(28:42):
it's if the numbers are vast,over 9000, Russian dead, these
punishing strikes on thelogistics and so forth, and
destruction of Russian frontlineunits. That is not something
that Putin counted on. Andthat's not something that the
Russians were expecting, theywere expecting a peacekeeping
operation, or limited operationto secure that these so called,
(29:05):
you know, Donetsk and Luhansk.
republics, which are, which iswhich don't exist, they were
Russian controlled territory. Sonow those things are going to
unfold. And it's really, reallygoing to cause a lot of, it's
going to cause a lot of unrestinside Russia that they're gonna
(29:25):
have to deal
Dr. David Shulkin (29:26):
with. I wanted to just switch the topic
just for one second, to get yourperspective on this. And that is
about the psychology of theAmerican people watching this on
their TVs. You know, we justwatched this horrific withdrawal
from Afghanistan. And, you know,it looked like the US was
(29:48):
finally out of conflicts andthat and that maybe the military
and veterans who are going totake a back seat, but I just
wonder what your what yourfeeling is, do you think that
the American public looks at ourmilitary now as having to remain
strong. And this is the reasonwhy we can never let our guard
(30:10):
down. Because while theredoesn't appear to be a threat
one day, it can appearovernight. Like what happened
here with Ukraine? Do you thinkthat this is going to impact the
way that Americans feel aboutour military and our veterans?
Alex Vindman (30:24):
I? Absolutely. So I think you know, we do not have
the luxury of letting our guarddown, we do not have the luxury
of receding back in retrenchingto our shores. This is the this
is a fundamental flaw to AmericaFirst policy is that somehow the
rest of the world? Well, youknow, the rest of the world
doesn't affect us. It does it.
And what we do also affects therest of the world. So, you know,
(30:45):
when our politicians make somepronouncements here or take
actions here, it doesn't justaffect domestic politics, it
affects the rest of the world.
And it gives Vladimir Putin agreen light to conduct his
military operation because hethinks the US is distracted or
divided, or that, you know, oneof the political parties is
going to take it easy on him,these things matter, we should
(31:08):
we forgotten our central placein the world. For whatever
reason, it's, you know, we'restill the sole superpower, we've
forgotten our place in theworld. You know, too much navel
gazing too much focus on thingsthat, frankly, that the
Ukrainians have probably wokenus up to, that there are real
struggles there. They're realchallenges, that they're real
(31:29):
threats. And I think ifanything, I actually see it
bringing us population togetherin a way that I haven't seen,
you know, not since September11. Certainly, January, six
people hoped that it would kindof bring the population together
didn't, because it fed the beaston on the big lie, but this is
seems to be bringing thepopulation together. So I'm
(31:50):
gonna be a little hopeful about
Louis Celli (31:51):
that. So I want to go back to something you said
earlier about sanctions. Andthis this unprovoked attack has
caused this conversation to cometo the forefront for the
American people. But America hascome to associate Russia with a
high degree of organized crime.
I mean, especially cybercrime,which really changes the
dynamics now, because criminalactivity isn't restricted to
just Russian homeland threats.
(32:12):
And the threats are now third,global menace. So this this war
aside, how does theinternational community police
this now that now that we'veseen this unfold?
Alex Vindman (32:23):
Well, one thing we could say is that Russia is
going to be greatly diminishedcoming out of this? Russia's
belligerents. I mean, it could,there's only so many times they
could try to do that the nuclearsaber rattling to intimidate us
before we like, Okay, be quiet,you cried wolf too many times.
And we know that's somethingthat he's going to because his
(32:44):
army is diminishing, that kindof boogeyman of conventional
forces and isn't there, he'sgoing to probably want to be or
whoever follows him is going tobe want to be very careful with
the saber rattling on thenuclear side. Because otherwise,
that will also be no longeruseful. It'll be diminished, as
as irrelevant. So I think weprobably will see a Russia, we
(33:06):
could end up with a Russia thatactually takes a healthy dose of
reality, and recognizes thatit's not the Soviet Union, that
the exceptionalism of the SovietUnion and having influence over,
you know, Eurasia is was amirage that let it down the
primrose path towards failure,and that they they undertake,
(33:27):
you know, really structuralreforms that that they need to
do internally, that actuallycould end up being that is not
as far fetched as it would havebeen to say that a week ago. But
the way this has unfolded hasbeen, it's been it's been pretty
darn bad. And that's not just onthe battlefields. That's just
from every element,informational, military,
(33:48):
economic, and diplomatic,political.
Louis Celli (33:52):
I'm really glad you brought up the Eurasia point,
because there's been a lot ofdiscussion lately about whether
whether Vladimir Putin has beenbolstered by President G in, you
know, in with China, and youknow, whether he has his back,
and we're I think we're seeingnow that this type of behavior,
this type of attack on humanrights, just isn't going to be
(34:15):
tolerated by the globalcommunity anymore, regardless of
who commits it. So this may havegiven states that the do these
types of things cause for pauseit, what are you seeing?
Alex Vindman (34:29):
I think that's a very astute analysis, I think I
feared that there would be achilling effect on democracy if
Ukraine was crushed, and therewas a timid response from the
west. But this powerful powerfulresponse from Ukraine setting
conditions for all this we therethat we should recognize who the
(34:50):
heroes are, but the Ukrainiansetting the conditions for this
have allowed democracy to rallyand we're in a world where
frankly, it's it's it's acautionary tale for
authoritarianism and overreachand the thing the fears that we
had about, you know, a Taiwanscenario are diminished now.
Because we could count on therest of the world being there.
(35:12):
And the fears that we had aboutkind of resurgent
authoritarianism andconsolidation are now frankly,
you know, a little bit easierthan they were, we still have a
lot of great dangers. I mean,you know, a cornered Russia that
feels it's under existentialthreat does have the most
(35:33):
powerful, the second mostpowerful nuclear arsenal in the
world, and we need to be on ourguard. But we should not we
should now be feeling our power,as democracies and living up to
kind of our own values and ourown aspirations, without
thinking second guessingourselves constantly. Colonel
Louis Celli (35:51):
Viman, we're just about out of time. But before we
go, take us through this. Howdoes this end? What does this
look like, give us give us yourprediction, on, on what we what
we might be able to expect onhow this ends,
Alex Vindman (36:03):
it likely ends with a great deal of tragedy,
but it does end it's it endswith Ukraine, or maintaining
sovereignty and independence.
That's one thing that's prettyclear. It ends with a greatly
diminished Russia and ends witha greatly diminished Putin. But
the scenario is the two kind ofmain, you know, directions are,
it ends relatively quickly,because Ukraine gets the aid it
(36:25):
needs and is able to reformat,Putin's thinking on on the
military in the ability to usethese punishing fires to destroy
cities, or extends for a longperiod of time. And it becomes
increasingly escalatory. Andthere's the possibility of for
the US being drawn in. And youhave a scenario in which you
(36:47):
know that we avoid that. But ifthere's a catastrophic loss for
Ukraine, but ultimately, I thinkyou Russia leaves Ukraine, after
wrecking cities, and saying thatthey successfully completed
their demilitarization do notsuffocation by force, even
though you know, we areUkrainian showed them up.
(37:09):
They'll just say that becausePutin could say that he's an
authoritarian, he could just sayI was successful, taking my
armies and going home, but he'she's inflicted a massive amount
of damage. The thing is thatthis is one shot, he blew it. He
no longer has. Ukraine no longerreally has to fear a threat of
Russia doing this again, becauseof how bloody is how badly
(37:32):
Russia has been bloodied. AndUkraine that gets rebuilt on the
back end of this is much morepowerful, much more capable to
face down future challenges.
Dr. David Shulkin (37:45):
We are running out of time, but two
quick questions if you couldanswer them, you know, rapidly.
First of all, what what is thechance of what is the scenario
that you would see that theUnited States gets drawn into
this militarily?
Alex Vindman (37:59):
It's it's hard to say what that what that looks
like, exactly, but it's probablya human disaster, you know, with
with just like a nightmare, likethe bombing of the the market in
Sarajevo or something of thatnature, galvanizing moment like
that, that the Russians are allabout certain to inflict, you
(38:23):
know, a errant missile thattakes down another airline or
something of that nature, wherewe have to move towards this is
why the options are a lot, a lotworse inside conflict than they
were outside to try to determineare we just didn't you know,
frankly, we didn't do enough.
Dr. David Shulkin (38:40):
And, and the last question, which I just have
to ask you, but being beingJewish, what is this that Putin
is talking about this notsuffocation? D not suffocation
when you have a Jewish Presidentof the Ukraine? And so can you
(39:00):
help? Can you help us understandthis a little bit better?
Alex Vindman (39:04):
Yeah, it's it's pretty absurd. Basically, you
know, when when Alinsky came topower, he was the only he had
actually a Jewish PrimeMinister. There was only one
other country in the world,Israel as a Jewish president and
Jewish Prime Minister. So it'sit's just kind of an absurd
throwback to what the Russianswould kind of call the
(39:26):
Ukrainians whenever they actedup the button data to because
the there were Ultranationalists during the Second
World War, fighting for freedomthat sided with the Nazis and
were complicit to some of theatrocities but this was a
country that was fighting forits freedom. And, you know, went
to horrible lengths to try toassure its freedom. So, I will
(39:52):
say that, you know, PresidentSolinsky has done us proud. He's
a Jewish Ukrainian guy. I'm aJewish Ukrainian guy. Our he's
one of our own. We're we're ahot commodity right now.
Louis Celli (40:06):
One. One final thing I'd like to end on this
before we go. One of the thingsyou said was it Putin took a
shot. And I think I think we'rea different society than we were
80 years ago between theinternet and the way information
travels the way the family's hasbeen, have been dispersed. So we
once you once, once the genie isout of the bottle on freedom and
(40:26):
democracy, it's hard to put thatback in. Where do you see where
do you see his vision on tryingto trying to conquer Europe?
Alex Vindman (40:35):
Putin's vision trying to conquer Europe, right?
In the toilet.
Dr. David Shulkin (40:39):
A good way to end.
Louis Celli (40:40):
Thank you so much for joining us.
Alex Vindman (40:43):
All right, thank you had a good time. Thanks for
your time to that. Okay.
Louis Celli (40:48):
And that really is all the time that we have for
this week. And we really want tothank our listeners for making
us one of the most listened topodcasts in the nonprofit space
on iTunes. It really is quite anaccomplishment. We will see you
next week.
Charlie Malone (41:05):
Thanks for listening to the policy bits
podcasts. For more informationabout projects and other
podcasts. Go to policy. That'sdot org.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!