Michael Clarke Ukraine war Q&A | Does Putin see an 'off-ramp'?

Key Concepts

Steve Wickoff and Diplomatic Conduct: The role and perceived naivety of US envoy Steve Wickoff in international diplomacy, particularly in relation to Donald Trump and Russian counterparts.
Leaked Phone Call: The implications of a leaked conversation between Wickoff and a Russian official, Ushakov, and its potential impact on Wickoff's position.
US-Russia Relations and Trump's Influence: The dynamics between the US and Russia, with a focus on Donald Trump's perceived influence and his approach to foreign policy.
Jared Kushner's Role: The potential involvement of Jared Kushner in US-Russia diplomacy and his past foreign policy achievements.
Crimea and International Recognition: The US stance on recognizing Russia's control over Crimea and the broader implications for international order.
Putin's Rhetoric and Genocidal Intent: Analysis of Vladimir Putin's statements regarding Ukraine and the interpretation of potential genocidal intent, linked to historical events like the Holodomor.
Peace Talks and Ceasefire Prospects: The likelihood and nature of peace talks or a ceasefire, with a focus on the obstacles presented by Russia.
US Support for Ukraine: The potential for the US to reduce or withdraw support for Ukraine, and the consequences for the conflict.
European Union and Frozen Russian Assets: The EU's deliberations on utilizing frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine and the challenges involved.
Trump's Claims on Ending the War: Examination of Donald Trump's assertions about his ability to end the war quickly and the lack of specific proposals.
Ukraine's Natural Resources and Rare Earths: The significance of Ukraine's mineral resources, particularly rare earths, and the global supply chain dynamics.
Putin's Strategic Calculations and "Off-Ramps": Putin's long-term strategy, his perception of an "off-ramp," and the impact of Trump's potential presidency.
Russian Economy Under Sanctions: The current state of the Russian economy, the impact of sanctions, and projections for its future.
Sanctions Comparison (Russia, Iran, North Korea): A comparative analysis of sanctions regimes applied to different countries.
Ukrainian Corruption and its Impact: The surfacing of corruption within Ukraine's inner circle and its potential implications for US relations and Western support.
Rule of Law in Ukraine vs. US/Russia: A comparison of the adherence to the rule of law by Ukrainian leadership versus that of the US and Russia.
Russian Tank Losses and Military Capacity: An assessment of Russia's remaining tank inventory and overall armored vehicle losses.

1. Steve Wickoff, Diplomatic Conduct, and the Leaked Phone Call

The discussion begins with a question regarding US envoy Steve Wickoff's ability to continue his role following a leaked phone call. Professor Michael Clark believes Wickoff "can and will" continue, despite the controversy. The leak, which appears to show Wickoff "coaching a Russian counterpart in how to butter up Donald Trump," is described as "completely undiplomatic" and indicative of Wickoff being "out of his depth in international diplomacy."

Key Point: Wickoff's close relationship with Donald Trump is a significant factor in his continued role, despite perceived diplomatic missteps.
Technical Term: Mediator: An impartial third party who attempts to help disputing parties reach a resolution. Wickoff's actions are seen as compromising his role as a mediator by appearing to favor one side.
Attribution: Professor Michael Clark states, "Yes, he can and yes, he will is is my sense."

The transcript clarifies that the leak's origin is debated, with some suggesting a Western security agency due to insecure communications, but Professor Clark leans towards Russian involvement. Wickoff himself reportedly attributed the leak to his Russian counterpart, Dmitri Ushakov, who is described as being "very close to Putin." The amateurish nature of the conversation, particularly Wickoff's alleged coaching of Ushakov on dealing with Trump, is highlighted.

Key Point: The leak's origin is uncertain but likely Russian, and the content of the conversation reveals a lack of diplomatic sophistication.
Example: Wickoff's practice of meeting with Putin with only a Russian-picked interpreter and no notes is cited as an example of his naivety, leading to differing accounts of discussions.
Argument: Professor Clark contrasts Wickoff's real estate background, where deals are driven by profit, with the complexities of political negotiations, where honor, prestige, and emotion play significant roles. He argues Wickoff is "good at the property deals, but he's out of his depth on on geopolitics."

2. Jared Kushner's Involvement and US-Russia Diplomacy

The conversation shifts to the potential involvement of Jared Kushner alongside Wickoff in Moscow. Professor Clark describes Kushner as a "bright character" with "instincts of a diplomat" and "experience" from the first Trump administration, particularly with the Abraham Accords. However, he notes Kushner's financial dealings in the Gulf, using the "Trump name," would be considered corrupt in other administrations.

Key Point: Kushner is seen as a more astute, albeit untrained, diplomat compared to Wickoff, with a history of foreign policy achievements.
Example: The Abraham Accords are cited as the "one achievement in foreign policy of the first Trump administration," with Kushner being instrumental.
Contrast: Kushner's perceived diplomatic acumen is contrasted with Wickoff's perceived naivety.

The reporting suggests Kushner and Wickoff are being sent to Russia to potentially recognize Russia's control over Crimea. Professor Clark argues this would not receive support in Europe, as it challenges the post-1945 world order. He distinguishes between de facto control (Russians being in Crimea) and legal recognition, which would "sell the pass on everything" and legitimize Putin's assertion that "wherever the Russian soldier to treads his Russian territory."

Key Point: The US potentially recognizing Crimea's annexation would undermine international law and the established world order.
Argument: Professor Clark emphasizes that changing boundaries by force is a "fundamental challenge to the world order."

3. Putin's Rhetoric and Historical Context

Putin's recent statement in Kyrgyzstan, interpreted as "the Russians will continue fighting until every Ukrainian has been killed," is discussed. Professor Clark clarifies Putin's exact words: "some assume or some want this war to fight its way to the last Ukrainian. If so, we are ready for that." He acknowledges this is still "pretty shocking" and suggests it reveals a "genocidal intent" in relation to Ukraine.

Key Point: Putin's rhetoric, even when nuanced, suggests a willingness to prolong the conflict to the extreme, implying a disregard for Ukrainian lives.
Historical Context: The discussion links Putin's current stance to his 2021 essay, where he argued Ukrainians are historically Russians and implied they are "subhuman" and do not deserve to exist as a distinct nation.
Example: The Holodomor (1932-33), a deliberate starvation of millions of Ukrainians by Stalin, is mentioned as a historical precedent of genocidal actions against Ukrainians, coinciding with the commemoration of the event.

4. Peace Talks, Ceasefire Prospects, and Shifting Blame

The question of whether peace talks are imminent and if the war is nearing its end is addressed. Professor Clark views the current diplomatic efforts as a cyclical process, repeating the same patterns seen in April and August. He believes the current round is "much more about shifting the blame" rather than genuinely seeking a resolution.

Key Point: The current diplomatic efforts are seen as a performance to shift blame for potential failure, rather than a genuine attempt at peace.
Argument: Professor Clark argues that the Russians "won't move their position one inch on any issue at all," making a peace deal unlikely. He states, "The man who is holding it up is Putin, not Zinsky, not the Europeans. It's Putin is the problem."
Observation: The Europeans are making "positive noises" to avoid appearing anti-American, but "everybody knows it's going to fail."

5. US Support for Ukraine and European Financial Challenges

A critical question arises about the potential for the US to withdraw support for Ukraine if diplomatic efforts fail. Professor Clark outlines two major concerns:

US Pulling the Plug: If the current diplomatic process fails, the US might cease intelligence sharing, targeting assistance, and allowing European nations to purchase weapons for Ukraine. This would significantly hinder Ukraine's ability to fight and potentially lead to territorial losses.
European Union and Frozen Russian Assets: The EU summit on December 18th is crucial for agreeing to make frozen Russian reserves available to Ukraine. Without this funding, Ukraine faces severe financial difficulties, potentially unable to even pay its soldiers.

Key Point: The future of US support for Ukraine and the EU's ability to finance Ukraine through frozen Russian assets are critical determinants of the war's trajectory.
Data: Ukraine needs approximately $60 billion to continue its operations.
Challenge: Belgium's government is identified as a potential obstacle to releasing the frozen assets, with concerns about shared liability.
Proposed Solution: Norway's sovereign wealth fund could act as a guarantor for the Russian reserves, providing an "elegant way around" the problem.
Argument: Professor Clark stresses the urgency, stating, "If we duck this challenge and just let the Ukrainians lose it and have to surrender, then we'll live with the implications of that. Our children and grandchildren will live with the implications of that for a very long time."

6. Trump's Claims on Ending the War and Past Diplomacy

Donald Trump's repeated assertion that he could end the war in 24 hours is analyzed. Professor Clark notes that Trump "never specifies" how he would achieve this, suggesting it's "presidential gibberish." He questions why Trump doesn't refer to Putin's past writings and speeches, which indicate a long-standing ambition regarding Ukraine.

Key Point: Trump's claims of ending the war are unsubstantiated and lack any concrete proposals.
Evidence: CNN reportedly recorded Trump making the "24-hour" claim 53 times.
Historical Context: The 2019 agreement signed between Ukraine and Russia, which Putin subsequently broke, is mentioned as evidence of Putin's unreliability.
Critique: Professor Clark points out that while Trump supplied some material to Ukraine (like Javelins), the sanctions against Russia were largely initiated by the Obama administration, contradicting Trump's narrative of being the sole effective dealmaker.

7. Ukraine's Natural Resources and the Rare Earths Issue

The discussion turns to a "precious earth deal" concerning Ukraine's natural resources, particularly rare earths. Professor Clark clarifies that Ukraine has a significant amount of lithium, but not an exceptional quantity of rare earths compared to other regions.

Key Point: The focus on rare earths in Ukraine is potentially overstated, and the real issue lies in the global processing of these minerals.
Technical Term: Rare Earths: A group of 17 chemical elements with unique properties crucial for modern technology (e.g., scandium, yttrium, lanthanides).
Global Context: China dominates 90-95% of rare earth production and processing, creating a strategic vulnerability for countries like the US.
Example: Trump's tariffs against China led to retaliatory tariffs and export controls on rare earths, causing an "incipient crisis" for the American auto industry due to supply chain disruptions.
Argument: Professor Clark expresses astonishment at the US's delayed realization of China's dominance in rare earth processing, calling it "naive and myopic." He notes that processing rare earths domestically would take "five, eight, 10 years."
Relevance to Ukraine: The rare earths in Ukraine are considered "a pretty low order of importance" in the current geopolitical landscape, especially since any extracted minerals would likely need to be sent to China for processing. The Russians already control about 40% of Ukraine's "useful minerals," which are concentrated in the conflict zones.

8. Putin's Strategic Calculations and the Absence of an "Off-Ramp"

Professor Clark believes Putin will not seek an "off-ramp" because he perceives Donald Trump's potential return to the White House as a strategic advantage. Putin's initial miscalculation in 2022 is acknowledged, but his subsequent "lucky" turn of events, with Trump's potential election, has transformed his outlook.

Key Point: Putin's strategic calculus has shifted from seeking an exit to prolonging the war, banking on Trump's presidency to achieve his objectives.
Argument: Putin's ambition is to be defined in history as a "great Russian leader," and the brutality and cost of the war are secondary to this goal. He is "very very anxious to be defined in history as one of the great Russian leaders."
Observation: Putin's previous ambiguity about war aims has been replaced by a clear intention to pursue the war "for as long as it takes up to the last Ukrainian if necessary."
Historical Parallel: The idea of offering an "off-ramp" is contrasted with Putin's perceived lack of pragmatism and his commitment to his war aims.

9. Russian Economy Under Sanctions

The discussion addresses the impact of economic sanctions on Russia. Professor Clark predicts "pressure" rather than a "collapse."

Data: Russian economic growth has slowed to 0.6% year-on-year, with potential for negative growth next year. Inflation is officially around 7.5%, but perceived to be higher. Interest rates have fallen from over 20% to 12-13%.
Energy Income: Russian energy income is down by approximately 35% this year, with projections of a $30 billion deficit this year and $50 billion next year.
Oil Prices: Brent crude is trading at $62, West Texas Intermediate at $58, and Urals oil (Russian marker) at $36 a barrel, indicating a $15 per barrel discount.
War Economy: Russia's economy has become a "war economy," with manufacturing plateauing due to limited capacity and skilled labor.
Sanctions Effectiveness: While not causing immediate collapse, sanctions create a "slow puncture" that will become more severe over time. The effectiveness of sanctions depends on consistent follow-up and targeting of "sanctions busters."
Comparison with Iran and North Korea:
- Russia: Most sanctioned country, with sanctions in place since 2014. Affects modern manufacturing and component supply.
- Iran: Sanctions were lifted after the JCPOA, leading to economic changes.
- North Korea: Sanctions are narrowly applied, and the country is sustained by China.
Specific Impact: Sanctions affect the supply of components for oil wellheads, which were drilled with Western technology and may be difficult for Russia to replicate if damaged.

10. Ukrainian Corruption and its Implications

The surfacing of corruption within Ukraine's inner circle, including searches of the chief of staff's office, is discussed. Professor Clark acknowledges this creates a negative image of Ukraine as a corrupt post-Soviet state.

Key Point: Corruption within Ukraine's leadership poses a challenge to its relationship with the US, particularly with MAGA Republicans who may use it to justify reduced support.
Distinction: Professor Clark emphasizes that the war is "not about corruption. It's about the blatant invasion of one country of another."
Silver Linings:
1. Rule of Law: President Zelenskyy is subject to the rule of law, unlike Trump (whose presidential actions are constitutionally protected from criminal responsibility) and Putin.
2. Principle of the Matter: Even with corruption, supporting Ukraine is justified due to the fundamental principle of resisting a blatant invasion and challenging the universal order.
Argument: The corruption issue is a "red herring" and does not negate the core reason for supporting Ukraine.
Impact on US Relations: The corruption charges will be exploited by MAGA Republicans to argue against aid to Ukraine, potentially influencing figures like JD Vance.

11. Russian Tank Losses and Military Capacity

The question of Russia's remaining tank numbers is addressed, with a focus on visually confirmed losses.

Data: At least 4,200 main battle tanks have been destroyed, according to the website Oryx, which tracks visually confirmed losses.
Starting Inventory: Russia is estimated to have started the war with around 3,000 operationally available tanks, plus another 4,000-5,000 in reserve, totaling approximately 8,000-9,000 main battle tanks.
Current Situation: Russia has lost about half of its available tanks.
Production Rate: Annual production is estimated at a maximum of 300 tanks, insufficient to replace losses significantly.
Other Armored Equipment: The total loss of Russian armored equipment (including infantry fighting vehicles, etc.) is around 30,000.
Sources: Oryx, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), and estimates from the UK Ministry of Defence and Ukraine are cited.

Conclusion/Synthesis

This Q&A session with Professor Michael Clark provides a detailed analysis of the ongoing Ukraine war, focusing on diplomatic intricacies, geopolitical strategies, and economic pressures. The discussion highlights the perceived diplomatic shortcomings of US envoy Steve Wickoff, the potential influence of Donald Trump and Jared Kushner on US-Russia relations, and the critical importance of the upcoming EU summit regarding frozen Russian assets. Professor Clark underscores Putin's strategic calculations, his apparent lack of interest in an "off-ramp," and his historical narrative regarding Ukraine. The economic impact of sanctions on Russia is assessed as a "slow puncture" rather than an immediate collapse, with specific data on oil prices and economic growth. Finally, the issue of corruption within Ukraine is framed as a challenge that, while damaging, does not alter the fundamental principle of supporting Ukraine against blatant aggression, and the significant losses of Russian military hardware, particularly tanks, are quantified. The overarching sentiment is one of continued conflict, with significant geopolitical and economic stakes for both Ukraine and the international order.