Mutual Miscalculation: Lt. General Ben Hodges on Putin's Invasion and America's Response

Abstract

Mutual Miscalculation:Lt. General Ben Hodges on Putin's Invasion and America's Response Anoushka Ramesh and Ben Hodges (bio) In the wake of Russia's 2022 Invasion of Ukraine, the world is asking what went wrong. How could we have predicted this? Why are the Russians having such a difficult time invading Ukraine? Ben Hodges, a retired Lieutenant General and former Commander of the United States Army Europe, joins GJIA to discuss the vulnerabilities of the Russian military and its implications for future alliances and strategies. GJIA: You recently stated that you were "convinced that Putin has already lost the war" and fearful of "a disintegration of the Russian Federation."1 Is this something we might see in the near future or a more gradual breakdown of the nation? BH: I think that we are looking at the next four or five years. If things continue as they are, it is not going to collapse immediately. And even if President Putin were to step down or, for whatever reason, come out of power, whoever might replace him would likely not be any better. But it seems to me that their invasion of Ukraine has revealed so many vulnerabilities and weaknesses inside the Russian Federation, especially with the fact that places like Kazakhstan, Georgia, Armenia, and even Belarus are not willing to provide troops to help. I can imagine bits and pieces of Russia, like Chechnya, breaking away. Do you think that the invasion of Ukraine is the result of Russia's governmental structure or the product of Putin's seemingly erratic state of mind? In other words, would this war still have occurred if Putin was not in power? I think it is a combination of Russian culture and a sense of where they are in the world that they feel entitled to this greater sphere. That has always been there since Peter the Great. It was Catherine the Great who annexed Crimea for the first time at the end of the eighteenth century. And certainly inside the Kremlin, there are plenty of enablers who have profited immensely from Putin's imperialism. And, of course, their imperialistic tendency has been manifested not just by military means but by also getting their tentacles into all markets, from Europe to Africa to the Middle East. But, from a personal standpoint, clearly the guy at the top, Vladimir Putin, all his actions and all the things he has written have actually been quite consistent. I would not say they are erratic. They are cruel, and most are illegal. But I think he really believes in what he says, and he does not have a problem with the deaths of tens of thousands of [End Page 210] people, including his own soldiers, and the total destruction of property. I do think that there is a personal element to this, particularly with regard to Ukraine. I think he absolutely hates Ukraine and everything it stands for, and he is determined to not only eliminate the State of Ukraine but also eliminate the idea of a State of Ukraine. So overall, there is a cultural element, current leadership, and then Putin himself that have all contributed to this. What do you think the future would look like after Putin? Well, I hope we find out soon. There was an excellent article that recently came out in Foreign Policy that discusses the nine myths of Russia's economy.2 It is really in trouble. And it cannot be turned around immediately. If all the sanctions ended today, the economy would not automatically be fixed. And a lot of artificial things are propping it up. Some of their own actions have pushed nations towards finding other sources as well as other types of energy, so they cannot count on that. And regarding the oil market, Asia depends somewhat on Russian oil, but not that much—only about a third of it. So that can be replaced. Because they export such a small amount of LNG, liquefied natural gas, they have to push natural gas through pipelines. But they are years away from having pipelines in place to be able to export gas towards China or anywhere else...