In this episode of Intelligence Matters, host Michael Morell talks to former CIA Deputy Director John McLaughlin about the global implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, including Russia itself, in Europe. Middle East and Asia. McLaughlin offers an analysis of the personal position of Russian President Vladimir Putin, the nature of a possible Ukrainian insurgency and the reconstruction that will have to follow the end of the war. Morell and McLaughlin also discuss the future of Western alliances, how China treats the world and how the world can deal with China now.
Highlights
- The future of Russia: “I do not see Russia emerging from this as anything other than an international pariah. And so on [Putin]has been lost, by virtue of what everyone agrees on now, I think, even if it still cannot be dealt with legally, but people agree that Russia is committing war crimes in Ukraine. It has lost its place in Russia at the world table. I can’t imagine being admitted to the G-20 or the G7, which will be received in major capitals, with the possible exception of Beijing and perhaps Delhi in the future. ”
- Reconstruction of Ukraine: “[A]When we see all this destruction in Ukraine: the broken buildings, the ruins, the transport arteries that are being destroyed, we have to rebuild. And I can’t think of a better way to build it, to rebuild it, than to somehow take all these reserves that we’ve hijacked from the Russians, which are currently blocked, frozen in different parts of the world, put in a kind of guarantee and make them pay for the reconstruction of Ukraine with this rather large fund of strong foreign exchange reserves that they have hidden … it should be the Russian money that they are rebuilding, the strong Russian currency that is rebuilding Ukraine. ”
- Putin calculation error: “[I]In any case, Putin has achieved exactly the opposite of what he aspired to achieve. In the end, it will probably have more countries embracing its NATO membership than before. So what a giant miscalculation. It is very difficult, looking back historically, to see such a miscalculation. You should go back to Hitler having the madness to invade Russia in World War II to find something that was as crazy a calculation as it has been in Ukraine. ”
- Implications for China: “[T]The other bigger dimension of this for the Chinese is that both, in slightly different ways, represent an alternative model to the global order that the United States has written and represented and advocated for, as you know, for 80 years. They project an alternative model. What Putin is doing there is not a good announcement for the model. And at this level, too, this could be more of a cost than a benefit to China. ”
Download, rate and subscribe here: iTunes, Spotify i Tip.
INTELLIGENCE MATTERS – JOHN MCLAUGHLIN
PRODUCER: OLIVIA GAZIS
MICHAEL MORELL: John, welcome back to Intelligence Matters. It’s great to have you back on the show.
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN: Thank you, Michael. Great to be with you.
MICHAEL MORELL: So, John, you wrote what I thought was a fascinating piece a few days ago. The title was “Tectonic Changes: How the Putin War Will Change the World.” It was published in a new online publication called Grid. Our listeners can find your piece by searching for “John McLaughlin” and “Grid” and it will appear right away. I highly suggest you read it.
I thought I was very insightful and what I really want to do today is kind of walk it with you because I think some of the points you make are incredibly important. But I wanted to start, John, with the conversation, how you started your piece with the conversation you had with the military historian Tom Ricks in the mountains of Sicily a few years ago. Can you tell us about this conversation and how it relates to what is happening in Ukraine today?
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN: Sure, Michael. This was a trip we used to take students to conflict zones and then study them. So we were in Sicily watching the Allied operation there in 1943, in which Allied forces jumped from North Africa to Sicily on their way to the Italian campaign.
And Rick and I were in the mountains of Sicily and on the scene of a great battle between the Germans and the Americans. And he said, “Do you think we’ll ever see something like this again?” And what he meant was, you know, big battles between major countries over large tracts of land, he basically said something like World War II.
And, as I recall, we both thought for a minute and said, “You probably aren’t.” We’ve probably overcome that.
Well, that’s what made me think about it, because when you see what’s going on in Ukraine, the pictures are all World War II. That’s all we’ve seen in all the frozen news of standing soldiers, getting ready to go to battle, ruins, people making their way through their belongings. Refugees fleeing apartments and civilian facilities collapsed.
And it made me think: this is not something anyone expected to see again in Europe. And the fact that it happens, I think, has made a lot of people say, “This is going to change the world.” And that’s why I wrote this piece.
I had to think, ‘What? Is true? Will the world really change? ‘ And I only set one year as, “How will it be in a year?” – it was my job in this piece. And as you know better than anyone, when you speculate about the future, you find yourself, you know, in dangerous terrain, a thin ice. But I thought, with everyone saying that, why not try the proposal? So that’s what I was trying to do here.
MICHAEL MORELL: So John, when I talked to people about this, one of the first things I said was that, you know, geopolitics, geostrategic issues, are like plate tectonics. They move very slowly. But every now and then, there is an earthquake. And this is an earthquake. This will have long-term consequences.
And I think when you get to the end of your piece, when you get to the end of this reflection exercise that you did here, I think you really make a strong argument that the world is going to be a fundamentally different place. within a year of what it is today. And maybe the place to start is exactly where you do it with Russia and where Russia will probably be a year from now.
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN: Well, I think the deepest and safest changes will be with Russia. No one can disagree with that, but I think that’s where they will be.
And if you think about it, before this war, Putin had a record, let’s say, a mixed record, but one in terms of the world looking at Russia, it had some positive elements. He had taken Russia from an unstable, unpredictable and volatile place in 1999 when he came to power and gave him prominence on the world stage with things like his intervention in Syria and really a diplomacy that was quite impressive in places. as far away from Russia as the Middle East, Africa, Latin America.
And even though we opposed many of the things he had done, taking over Crimea, etc., the world still regarded Russia as a major power. And he participated in all the great international meetings.
Well. I don’t see how Russia emerges from this as anything other than an international pariah. And so it was lost, by virtue of what everyone agrees on now, I think, even if it still can’t be dealt with legally, but people agree that Russia is committing war crimes in Ukraine. It has lost its place in Russia at the world table. I don’t imagine it being admitted to the G-20 or the G7, which will be welcomed in the big capitals with the possible exception of Beijing and maybe Delhi in the future.
And the people who worked with him, who had moved on the world stage with some respect and access as foreign minister, prime minister, other great figures, are now seen as complicit in something that almost everyone condemns. So what does all this add up at the end of a year, in a year’s time? I think Russia has very little weight in the world. Which was not to be the case, even with all the things he had done before: raids on Iraq, Ukraine, seizure of Crimea, poisonings. However, people did not look the other way, but accepted as, “That’s right, that’s Russia, but we’ll take care of it.”
So I think from now on, I don’t think people want to treat him the same way. And that means if you’re in Russia now, and you’re in the military or what we call the ministries of power, the intelligence services, you have to ask yourself, “Is this the kind of world we want? Is that what we want Russia to be like in the world, and that could affect Putin’s personal position at some point?
In this piece I say – without making a firm prediction – I only say that in the years I have looked at it – at least 22 years ago I have looked at it – it is the first time I can imagine that I could lose power at some point. , through some process in Russia that we can’t quite imagine right now.
MICHAEL MORELL: You know, John, it’s deeply ironic, isn’t it, that Putin wants to go down in history as the leader who made Russia great again? You know, like one of the great tsars. And here, you are describing a situation that is quite the opposite: as the leader who significantly weakened Russia. It is deeply ironic.
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN: There are so many ironies here. It is deeply ironic. The other day I read – I take it for granted – that in a Russian school, students were handing out a teacher to say a line that challenged or disagreed with Russian politics. This is exactly what happened in Nazi Germany.
In other words, there is a lot of evidence and example that in Nazi Germany the Hitler Youth was so imbued with the doctrine that Nazi propaganda was being said that if the teachers spoke badly in some way, they would lose their jobs and they would be delivered.
So the irony is that he said he is attacking Ukraine; this was his initial justification for the purpose of “de-Nazizing” him, when in some respects he might be Nazizing his own country. I find the ultimate irony here.
MICHAEL MORELL: This is one of the reasons why so many young and educated Russians have left the country and may never return.
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN. That’s something I’ve been thinking about a lot. I have dealt with many Russians, mostly former officials or academics or members of institutes, and so on. And while I disagree with them in politics and even in Crimea, I could understand what they would do, but I can’t believe they were endorsing what they are doing now.
And I suspect some of them may have left. Or if they haven’t left, they’re probably mortified by what they say.
But he could be wrong. I mean, maybe there’s more support for that in Russia than I can imagine. As I point out in the piece, reliable polls show that 51% of the Russian population still admires Stalin. Therefore, this may be a universe of opinion that we do not fully understand.
MICHAEL MORELL: John, in an email you shared with me and a couple of other former agency officials, you talked about how the Russian media might be watching the murder of women and children in Ukraine. And I thought you were telling a fascinating story about drinking toast with Russians. Can you share it? Because I thought it was very powerful.
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN: Well, it’s a very personal and very anecdotal thing, I guess, but when I was in Russia, either as a civil servant for talks with Russian officers or Russian intelligence, and as you know, we always try to maintain less formal contacts with them.
Or, when I’m in college, …
Add Comment