When the President of the United States calls you a “crazy son of a bitch,” that’s a sign: you’re pissing him off.
In Joe Biden’s defense, it is easy to understand why he lost his temper with Vladimir Putin. Almost two years to the day after giving the green light to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the tyrant appears to be on a roll.
And this time, it’s not just the Russian media that are saying it. The journalist – and author of the essay Putin’s men – Catherine Belton remarked last Saturday in the Washington Post that the Russian president “seems unstoppable”.
A few days later, a text from Agence France-Presse raised a troubling question about the war in Ukraine: Is Putin winning?
I discussed it this week with three experts from Russia and Ukraine. They all believe that caution should be exercised when trying to interpret recent developments in these two countries.
Among the successes – and I use this word with regret, because all of Putin’s victories are tragic and disastrous – of the Russian regime, one of the most resounding was the capture of Avdiivka. It is a city in eastern Ukraine where intense fighting has been taking place for several months.
This is “a very important point” for Vladimir Putin, Ekaterina Piskunova, who teaches in the political science department at the University of Montreal, told me.
Not only is this gain symbolic, but it also comes shortly after the appointment of a new commander-in-chief for the Ukrainian armed forces, Oleksandr Syrsky. A decision, she said, which seems to indicate that “things are not going very well in the office (of Ukrainian President) Volodymyr Zelensky”.
That said, she does not believe that it can be said that Vladimir Putin has just had “a good week”.
It’s a combination of circumstances. If the tide has turned, it’s not this week. It’s been a few months already, with the failure of the Ukrainian counterattack. Vladimir Putin is banking on attrition, on attrition. And the state of things seems to confirm this wear and tear and the fatigue of the West in general.
Ekaterina Piskunova, professor in the department of political science at the University of Montreal
In terms of other positive developments for Vladimir Putin, there is indeed the rebellion of certain influential Republicans in the House of Representatives, who are blocking new military aid of 60 billion US dollars to Ukraine.
The President of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, persists in refusing to hold a vote on this crucial grant, even though the Senate has just given him the green light (a majority of the members of both chambers of the American Congress must imperatively approve the initiative).
“One of the causes of the loss of Avdiïvka is precisely the fact that the Ukrainians are starting to run out of ammunition and artillery. And the Europeans do not provide,” points out Dominique Arel, holder of the Chair of Ukrainian Studies at the University of Ottawa.
PHOTO ARMEND NIMANI, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE ARCHIVES
Tribute to Alexeï Navalny in front of the Russian embassy in Pristina, Kosovo, on February 20. The political opponent died in unclear circumstances while detained in a Russian penal colony in the Arctic.
I also discussed with him another development that Putin should welcome: the death of his main political opponent, Alexei Navalny. The circumstances of this death remain unclear, but almost everyone agrees that the Russian president is ultimately responsible.
I must admit that Navalny on Friday and Avdiïvka on Saturday, in quick succession, are two blows to the stomach for the Russian opposition and for Ukraine as well as the coalition that supports it.
Dominique Arel, holder of the Chair of Ukrainian Studies at the University of Ottawa
But again, nothing is black or white. Everything is in nuances.
“On Avdiïvka, yes, it is a loss, but it took at least six months of intense fighting for the Russian army to advance 31 km. And the losses, which are impossible to verify very precisely, would be between 15,000 and 25,000 dead or seriously injured on the Russian side,” underlines the expert. Not to mention the military equipment that was destroyed.
“Can Russia afford to take this very high level of losses and continue to move forward? It’s a question mark. »
PHOTO ARCHIVES AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Ukrainian troops recently withdrew from the town of Avdiivka.
As for the death of Alexeï Navalny, it is tragic and it is the culmination of a cruel game led by Putin, that much is obvious.
But “this is not necessarily a positive factor for him,” says Ekaterina Piskunova.
First, the professor is not “convinced” of the importance of Alexei Navalny as a “serious opponent” of the Kremlin. Then, this death could serve the Democrats in Washington, who are trying to convince the Republicans to help the Ukrainian regime.
“One more pretext for them to say: look what an odious figure Putin is, Ukraine needs weapons to fight him,” she explains.
From conversations with these two academics, as well as with political science professor at McGill University Maria Popova, I learned that it is important to demonstrate perspective, at a time when one news chases the other, to properly assess the current situation.
Remember that Russia is supposed to be a superpower and has now spent two years unsuccessfully trying to conquer Ukraine, a much smaller country.
Maria Popova, professor of political science at McGill University
She then further contextualizes the progress of the Russian regime by explaining that, in her opinion, they are directly linked to the numbness of Western countries, whose economies are far from being “on a war footing.”
“It’s a very dangerous moment right now, not because Russia is strong, but because we are hesitant,” she judges. Nothing is predetermined about Russia’s strength and success. We only have ourselves to blame. »
What do you think ? Participate in the dialogue
reference: www.lapresse.ca