The changes of our economic and military status

"Russia’s demands include a legally binding halt to NATO’s eastward expansion and a withdrawal of NATO troops from countries like Poland and Baltic nations that used to be aligned with or part of the Soviet Union. The United States has dismissed those demands as nonstarters, even as American officials offered talks on other matters, such as military exercises and the placement of missiles.

The United States has authorized the Baltic states to send Stinger anti-aircraft missiles to Ukrainian forces to bolster defenses should Russia attack, according to two officials from Baltic countries who are familiar with the deal.

Stinger missiles are unlikely to significantly alter the Russian calculus in any military action, according to experts, in part because it is unclear to what extent Russia might rely on airpower over Ukrainian territory.

But their delivery would be a potent symbolic gesture from the United States. The C.I.A. provided the weapons systems to mujahedeen fighters during the Soviet war with Afghanistan in the 1980s, allowing them to shoot down hundreds of planes and helicopters and precipitate the eventual Soviet withdrawal.

It is not yet clear how many missile systems will be delivered or when they might get into the hands of front-line Ukrainian soldiers.

A Lithuanian military official familiar with the Stinger deal said that the delivery was likely to take several weeks at least. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity, because the deal had not been publicly announced.

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier on the U.S. authorization allowing Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia to send the Stingers, as well as Javelin anti-tank missiles, to Ukraine.

Stingers were decisive in Afghanistan because, before their delivery by the C.I.A., mujahedeen fighters had no anti-aircraft defenses to speak of, giving Soviet aircraft near invincibility in the skies. Ukrainian forces have an array of anti-aircraft weaponry, including Soviet-made Igla-2s, which are like Stingers but are less effective, according to military analysts.

While Stingers would pose a threat to Russian aircraft, forcing them to fly higher, their delivery into the hands of Ukrainian soldiers would have only “a limited impact tactically” against any Russian military operation, said Konrad Musyka, an expert on the Russian military and president of Rochan Consulting.

“Strategically, Russia is unlikely to reconsider its actions against Ukraine,” he said.

Robert Lee, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and Ph.D. candidate at King’s College in London who studies Russian military tactics, said that the weapons would be useful only if Russia were to use airpower over Ukrainian territory and not rely fully on ground-based artillery and rocket forces.

“I’m not sure how much Russia will rely on aviation over Ukrainian airspace given their advantages in ground-based fires,” he said.

In sum, Mr. Putin’s agenda would represent a far-reaching reduction of American influence and a return to Russian sway over much of Eastern and Central Europe, resembling Cold War-era lines.

Another Russian demand is a ban on the deployment of nuclear weapons outside each country’s national territories, which would mean that the United States would have to remove its nuclear weapons from Europe — though Russia would be able to keep nuclear weapons on its European territory.

In December, Mr. Putin’s diplomats laid out their demands in writing: a draft of a treaty with the United States and an agreement with NATO, both published in English on the Russian Foreign Ministry’s website. The drafts, containing a total of 17 articles, were not a “menu” from which the West could pick and choose, but represented the “complex, all-encompassing approach” that Russia was demanding, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei A. Ryabkov said.

The drafts include some points that could form a basis for fruitful discussion, analysts and officials have said, including limits on intermediate-range missiles and the establishment of telephone hotlines between Russia and NATO.

Mr. Putin has warned of an unspecified “military-technical response” if he does not get his way. Russian diplomats have hinted that could mean the deployment of nuclear weapons in countries or waters near the United States, a suggestion with echoes of the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, perhaps the tensest point of the Cold War.

The military buildup near Ukraine signals that the Kremlin could use force to return that country to Russia’s sphere of influence. Given the complexity and intensity of the buildup, whether Mr. Putin is serious about pursuing a diplomatic path or just preparing for war is an open question.

Russia has insisted on a point-by-point response, to compel American officials to take positions on all of its demands. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken said on Friday that the United States was prepared to offer a written response next week, along with a description of America’s concerns with Russia’s behavior.

That threat was underlined when Russian officials said they wanted NATO to remove troops and weapons not only from Poland and the Baltic countries that border Russia, but also from Romania and Bulgaria on NATO’s southern flank. In response, France, which has a longstanding relationship with Romania, offered to send troops there if its NATO allies agreed.

And then third, there’s the economy. The West has already threatened severe sanctions against Russia were it to go ahead with military action, but Russia has been essentially sanctions-proofing its economy since at least 2014, which is when it took control of Crimea and was hit by all these sanctions from the U.S. and from the E.U. So Russia’s economy is still tied to the West.

It imports a lot of stuff from the West. But in many key areas, whether it’s technology or energy extraction or agriculture, Russia is becoming more self-sufficient. And it is building ties to other parts of the world — like China, India, et cetera — that could allow it to diversify and have basically an economic base even if an invasion leads to a major crisis in its financial and economic relationship with the West.

The Biden administration and NATO are increasingly wary that, in his pursuit of greater influence in Eastern Europe, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia may forgo an invasion of Ukraine in favor of far more disruptive options.

On the sidelines of negotiations in European capitals last week, Mr. Putin’s aides suggested that if he were frustrated in his aims of extending Russia’s sphere of influence and securing written commitments that NATO will never again enlarge, then he would pursue Russia’s security interests with results that would be felt acutely in Europe and the United States.

There were hints, never quite spelled out, that nuclear weapons could be shifted to places — perhaps not far from the United States coastline — that would reduce warning times after a launch to as little as five minutes, potentially igniting a confrontation with echoes of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis."

 

The Cuban crisis erupted with the appearance of U.S. nuclear weapons in Turkey, near the Russian border. Russia has brought nuclear weapons to Cuba, near the U.S. border. The crisis has been quelled by removing nuclear weapons from both places by secret agreement.