Let me first of all say I like your writing and I think you have covered Russia’s war in Ukraine solidly.
This may seem a self-serving and defensive comment, but as Director of the Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House I thought I should just pop you a note in response to the “mocking Chatham House or the CIA does not undo the damage they did” comment.
It is true that three Chatham House publications are referenced in the [excellent] O’Brien-Cohen research that inspired your article. But they are more used as context or to evidence certain points than as research papers which had gotten it wrong.
Over the years, I think I’d argue that we have called Russia right - in fact, we’re the only UK think-tank designated an “undesirable organisation” by the Russian state. That suggests to me we’ve been more or less over the target.
In addition, unlike many institutes referenced in the Cohen-O'Brien report, Chatham House cannot be criticised for never having thought about the Ukrainian side of the equation as we set up a ‘Ukraine Forum’ as early as 2014 - dedicating resources towards analysis and support (and, when merited, criticism) of that country.
All that said, Nick, we should all be a bit more humble about our analytical (and especially predictive) abilities.
And so if that’s your honest view of Chatham House, then fair play. I don’t hold it against you.
I hope you don’t mind my mounting a defence though.
Terrific article, Nick. Since you mention the once-authoritative Foreign Policy, I’ve noticed how quickly it’s become a melting pot of cranks adrift from reality. The proliferation of treatises on how to stop the Gaza War and “Jump Start” a “peace process” is the sure sign of an industry based on a scam built on a lie. For that matter, journalism itself has become a sewer floating with self-important turds who can’t even ask the obvious question, one year on, why Gaza had no shelters for their vulnerable children. I’m sure the kinder-transporten hadn’t been forgotten; but devotion to truth has. Truth is now anchored to relative morality in an effort to avoid rocking the boat. Wapo’s neutral headline:“Nasrallah: Terrorist to Some, Saviour to Others”, was followed by not one instance of lives saved. In this morass, Ukrainians and Jews pay the price.
Korruption of the west... more than it already is... was a prerequisite of the Putin imperial project. Thus Brexit, Trump, the NRA, the Telegraph, the property markets, the Conservative friends of Russia, Farage, the CDU, the GOP... and crucially journalism.. were all subject to becoming part of a Putin Judo throw. Working with those already inclined.. remember May told the SIS to ignore Russia and the playing down in the media of what Russia was doing leading up to Brexit was constant despite Putin assassinating oligarchs on British soil and sparing oligarchs who were donating to the tories ( James Cleverly pointing out that donors were due something for their cash )... so small state tax evaders and libertarian dreamers joined happily with the far right, anti establishment grifters, empire nostalgists and the spoiled and the grumpy... and the Cameroonian incompetents.
So surely in this mix.. we have the Putin judo throwing experts in the field of foteign policy: Putin puffed up as strategy.. but his forces still ate hay.
Much appreciated and in particular thank you for including the link to the O’Brien Cohen report. Whether all the statements within it are accurate or not is beside the point. There is enough miscalculation and blindness to evidence within it to be getting on with. There are lessons for the West which we ignore at our cost.
Putin, and Netanyahu, think they can play Biden and so far it seems they have a point. That could all change in an instant and it would be no bad thing if it did.
And I think Nick's being harsh on the Biden administration, the CIA, and the US intelligence community in general. In the months before the Feb '22, they were the ones sounding the alarm bells. Almost everyone else, including Zelensky, chose to ignore those warnings until Russian tanks started to cross the border and the missiles were already flying.
Will someone tell me if Ukraine has all these long range rockets why it needs permission to fire them. Surely it should use all the armaments it has to its best advantage. When long range Russian rockets hit Ukraine, they know where they came from and should fire back at those sites. Similarly air force bases in Russia. I am sure that the American armaments supplied to Britain during WW2 were not supplied without permission to be used. Ukraine should ignore the need for permission to use these weapons and catch the Russians unaware. One thing is certain and that is that Putin would never risk war with NATO.
Ukraine doesn't actually have the longer range version of ATACMS. The version they do have was given on the condition it would not be fired at targets on Russian soil. It can travel only 300km, so its effect would be limited and Russia has moved many assets out of range already. That said, oil depots, refineries, and munitions dumps within range cannot be moved and remain vulnerable. Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG cruise missiles are not long range either, and were also donated under the same terms as ATACMS. Oh, and if Ukraine ignored its allies and tried to use them anyway, they would find they could not strike their targets since they need targeting data only the US can provide.
Unhappily, in WW2, nuclear escalation did not have to be taken into account when making decisions about what weapons to supply. Putin is losing a war he does not know how to end. No one wants to push him into taking an irrational, paranoid decision. He one of the last people who should ever be given the nuclear red button but, again, unhappily, that is exactly what he possesses. No one wants to be the fool who pushes too hard.
"...that people who make prediction their business— the experts who appear on television and advise governments and businesses — were, if you will forgive my bluntness, full of shit".
He’s not levelled Kiev. The media have been lying to you. He’s significantly damaged places like Kharkiv which is on the border. The Russians have destroyed Vovchansk. But not Kiev. Because that’s where they own assets. The Hollywood actor Michael Douglas visited two weeks ago and took a tour of the city’s architecture including St Michaels Square and the Golden domed monastery. Honestly this is the problem with not seeing things with your own eyes. You become taken in by corporate media lies.
Um, maybe I can take a little heat out of this by pointing out first, that more than a thousand drones, cruise missiles and air-launched ballistic missiles have been fired at Kyiv. Secondly, the vast majority of them were shot down, but those that did get through caused indiscriminate damage.
So, yes, Russia has tried to devastate Kyiv. But it failed. You haven't been lied to. The error is not of corporate lies but one of omission in that you don't realise the scale of the Russian bombardment because you haven't read about in your news feed. I'd suggest finding another source. And I'm very happy that the great Michael Douglas could still get to see the sights of Kyiv. But it was only possible because of Ukraine's air defences.
So it has nothing to do with the three miles of Luxury Apartments owned by wealthy Saudi, Russian and Chinese on Bohatyreska Street then?
USA Today did an article. It was a clever piece of manipulation involving landmark buildings being damaged in Kiev. Followed by satellite photos of other locations in Ukraine to give the impression of mass devastation. Which isn’t the case. The fact that a veteran journalist can say Putin has levelled Kiev. That’s patently not true. So one has to wonder if that gentleman is misinformed. Or deliberately misleading people?
You're correct. It has nothing to do with the immense barrage of drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles fired at Kyiv. If it did, then that would not of happened. Ergo, it has nothing to do with it.
I understand the point you're making, but you are over-reaching with your conclusions. There was no need to link two unrelated facts. Please, try to make sure whatever claims you make in the future are at least not contradicted by easily demonstrable evidence. You will find people more wiling to listen to you if you do.
What evidence? What are you talking about? I visited Kiev in 2020. A Ukrainian friend showed me the massive amount of foreign real estate investment. That’s the real reason they aren’t going to level it. Same with London. At best the Russians would do a chemical attack. But they aren’t going to nuke buildings they already bought with laundered money are they? That’s why a lot of defence spending is nonsensical.
I feel like I’m being asked to play along with a global lie here. I’m just saying it as it is. Kiev is far from levelled.
Dear Nick
Let me first of all say I like your writing and I think you have covered Russia’s war in Ukraine solidly.
This may seem a self-serving and defensive comment, but as Director of the Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House I thought I should just pop you a note in response to the “mocking Chatham House or the CIA does not undo the damage they did” comment.
It is true that three Chatham House publications are referenced in the [excellent] O’Brien-Cohen research that inspired your article. But they are more used as context or to evidence certain points than as research papers which had gotten it wrong.
Over the years, I think I’d argue that we have called Russia right - in fact, we’re the only UK think-tank designated an “undesirable organisation” by the Russian state. That suggests to me we’ve been more or less over the target.
If it’s of interest, here’s an earlier study on the same topic which takes a much broader approach and highlights several of our publications as getting it right, by going against the consensus -https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10758216.2023.2253359
In addition, unlike many institutes referenced in the Cohen-O'Brien report, Chatham House cannot be criticised for never having thought about the Ukrainian side of the equation as we set up a ‘Ukraine Forum’ as early as 2014 - dedicating resources towards analysis and support (and, when merited, criticism) of that country.
All that said, Nick, we should all be a bit more humble about our analytical (and especially predictive) abilities.
And so if that’s your honest view of Chatham House, then fair play. I don’t hold it against you.
I hope you don’t mind my mounting a defence though.
Respectfully,
James Nixey
Director, Russia and Eurasia Programme
Chatham House
That is very gracious of you James, and your defence is well made.
Terrific article, Nick. Since you mention the once-authoritative Foreign Policy, I’ve noticed how quickly it’s become a melting pot of cranks adrift from reality. The proliferation of treatises on how to stop the Gaza War and “Jump Start” a “peace process” is the sure sign of an industry based on a scam built on a lie. For that matter, journalism itself has become a sewer floating with self-important turds who can’t even ask the obvious question, one year on, why Gaza had no shelters for their vulnerable children. I’m sure the kinder-transporten hadn’t been forgotten; but devotion to truth has. Truth is now anchored to relative morality in an effort to avoid rocking the boat. Wapo’s neutral headline:“Nasrallah: Terrorist to Some, Saviour to Others”, was followed by not one instance of lives saved. In this morass, Ukrainians and Jews pay the price.
Korruption of the west... more than it already is... was a prerequisite of the Putin imperial project. Thus Brexit, Trump, the NRA, the Telegraph, the property markets, the Conservative friends of Russia, Farage, the CDU, the GOP... and crucially journalism.. were all subject to becoming part of a Putin Judo throw. Working with those already inclined.. remember May told the SIS to ignore Russia and the playing down in the media of what Russia was doing leading up to Brexit was constant despite Putin assassinating oligarchs on British soil and sparing oligarchs who were donating to the tories ( James Cleverly pointing out that donors were due something for their cash )... so small state tax evaders and libertarian dreamers joined happily with the far right, anti establishment grifters, empire nostalgists and the spoiled and the grumpy... and the Cameroonian incompetents.
So surely in this mix.. we have the Putin judo throwing experts in the field of foteign policy: Putin puffed up as strategy.. but his forces still ate hay.
Much appreciated and in particular thank you for including the link to the O’Brien Cohen report. Whether all the statements within it are accurate or not is beside the point. There is enough miscalculation and blindness to evidence within it to be getting on with. There are lessons for the West which we ignore at our cost.
Putin, and Netanyahu, think they can play Biden and so far it seems they have a point. That could all change in an instant and it would be no bad thing if it did.
Here's a link to the roundtable discussion CSIS held to launch the report:
https://www.csis.org/events/report-launch-russia-ukraine-war-and-study-analytic-failure
And I think Nick's being harsh on the Biden administration, the CIA, and the US intelligence community in general. In the months before the Feb '22, they were the ones sounding the alarm bells. Almost everyone else, including Zelensky, chose to ignore those warnings until Russian tanks started to cross the border and the missiles were already flying.
Will someone tell me if Ukraine has all these long range rockets why it needs permission to fire them. Surely it should use all the armaments it has to its best advantage. When long range Russian rockets hit Ukraine, they know where they came from and should fire back at those sites. Similarly air force bases in Russia. I am sure that the American armaments supplied to Britain during WW2 were not supplied without permission to be used. Ukraine should ignore the need for permission to use these weapons and catch the Russians unaware. One thing is certain and that is that Putin would never risk war with NATO.
Ukraine doesn't actually have the longer range version of ATACMS. The version they do have was given on the condition it would not be fired at targets on Russian soil. It can travel only 300km, so its effect would be limited and Russia has moved many assets out of range already. That said, oil depots, refineries, and munitions dumps within range cannot be moved and remain vulnerable. Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG cruise missiles are not long range either, and were also donated under the same terms as ATACMS. Oh, and if Ukraine ignored its allies and tried to use them anyway, they would find they could not strike their targets since they need targeting data only the US can provide.
Unhappily, in WW2, nuclear escalation did not have to be taken into account when making decisions about what weapons to supply. Putin is losing a war he does not know how to end. No one wants to push him into taking an irrational, paranoid decision. He one of the last people who should ever be given the nuclear red button but, again, unhappily, that is exactly what he possesses. No one wants to be the fool who pushes too hard.
"...that people who make prediction their business— the experts who appear on television and advise governments and businesses — were, if you will forgive my bluntness, full of shit".
Present company excluded of course!
At last, a subject – the cluelessness of " experts" – on which you and Michael Gove agree. It had to happen.
Except they were right on brexit... an error of geopolitical significance as it led chronologically to a physical military attack.
Crimea Brexit Ukraine... uncanny.
Also Kiev is full of real estate owned by Putins friends. So they’ve no incentive to level the place. Because who bombs their own piggy bank?
Except that Putin has done exactly that.
He’s not levelled Kiev. The media have been lying to you. He’s significantly damaged places like Kharkiv which is on the border. The Russians have destroyed Vovchansk. But not Kiev. Because that’s where they own assets. The Hollywood actor Michael Douglas visited two weeks ago and took a tour of the city’s architecture including St Michaels Square and the Golden domed monastery. Honestly this is the problem with not seeing things with your own eyes. You become taken in by corporate media lies.
Um, maybe I can take a little heat out of this by pointing out first, that more than a thousand drones, cruise missiles and air-launched ballistic missiles have been fired at Kyiv. Secondly, the vast majority of them were shot down, but those that did get through caused indiscriminate damage.
So, yes, Russia has tried to devastate Kyiv. But it failed. You haven't been lied to. The error is not of corporate lies but one of omission in that you don't realise the scale of the Russian bombardment because you haven't read about in your news feed. I'd suggest finding another source. And I'm very happy that the great Michael Douglas could still get to see the sights of Kyiv. But it was only possible because of Ukraine's air defences.
So it has nothing to do with the three miles of Luxury Apartments owned by wealthy Saudi, Russian and Chinese on Bohatyreska Street then?
USA Today did an article. It was a clever piece of manipulation involving landmark buildings being damaged in Kiev. Followed by satellite photos of other locations in Ukraine to give the impression of mass devastation. Which isn’t the case. The fact that a veteran journalist can say Putin has levelled Kiev. That’s patently not true. So one has to wonder if that gentleman is misinformed. Or deliberately misleading people?
You're correct. It has nothing to do with the immense barrage of drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles fired at Kyiv. If it did, then that would not of happened. Ergo, it has nothing to do with it.
I understand the point you're making, but you are over-reaching with your conclusions. There was no need to link two unrelated facts. Please, try to make sure whatever claims you make in the future are at least not contradicted by easily demonstrable evidence. You will find people more wiling to listen to you if you do.
What evidence? What are you talking about? I visited Kiev in 2020. A Ukrainian friend showed me the massive amount of foreign real estate investment. That’s the real reason they aren’t going to level it. Same with London. At best the Russians would do a chemical attack. But they aren’t going to nuke buildings they already bought with laundered money are they? That’s why a lot of defence spending is nonsensical.
I feel like I’m being asked to play along with a global lie here. I’m just saying it as it is. Kiev is far from levelled.