Lilia Shevtsova
{
"authors": [
"Lilia Shevtsova"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Russia",
"Eastern Europe",
"Ukraine"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Obama Blinks
Barack Obama’s recent remarks at West Point show that he doesn’t understand the rules of the game he’s playing with Vladimir Putin in Ukraine.
Source: American Interest
It’s been almost a week and I am still puzzled by President Barack Obama’s commencement address at West Point on May 28—and I’m even more puzzled by his interview with Steve Inskeep on NPR. But I’m not going to analyze how Obama views American leadership, nor will I argue what U.S. foreign policy should be. This is not my piece of cake. Besides, being a Russian citizen, I feel that it would be inappropriate to deliberate on what America’s interests are and how Washington should defend them. However, I would like to offer a few comments on what President Obama said on an area that I hail from, and one that I hope I understand: Ukraine and Russia.
The Ukrainian crisis and Russia’s annexation of Crimea have knocked down the post-Cold War order, and we’ve entered this époque of turmoil on President Obama’s watch. Robert Kagan, in his brilliant, breathtaking analysis of our current “Time of Trouble” and the evolution of American foreign policy, wrote that today we may see “a transition into a different world order or into a world disorder of kind not seen since the 1930s.” Meanwhile, President Obama, in his West Point remarks, gives the impression that he believes that America still exercises successful global leadership, and that the world, though irritating at certain points and times, is still quite manageable. Let’s quote several of the things he said about the Ukrainian drama, and I’ll respond to each in turn:Obama: “Our ability to shape world opinion helped isolate Russia right away.”
What I see, rather, is an incredibly successful Kremlin attempt to prevent Russia’s isolation. True, Putin was banned, apparently temporarily, from the G-8, and key Western leaders ignored the Sochi Olympics and a high-level meeting. But there are no signs that Putin suffered from these slights. On the contrary, he continues to keep in touch with Merkel and Hollande, apparently enjoying the German Chancellor’s attempts to persuade him to behave. Moreover, the Kremlin has succeeded in broadening its international support base: It has made its own pivot to China (and even tried to cozy up to Japan, with the latter’s apparent consent); and it has also won applause from the global Left-Right International, which hates America and the European Union. Moreover, soon Putin, on the invitation of French President Hollande, will celebrate D-Day in Normandy in the company of other Western leaders. Is this what isolation looks like? ...
Read the full text of this article in the American Interest.
About the Author
Former Senior Associate, Russian Domestic Politics and Political Institutions Program, Moscow Center
Shevtsova chaired the Russian Domestic Politics and Political Institutions Program at the Carnegie Moscow Center, dividing her time between Carnegie’s offices in Washington, DC, and Moscow. She had been with Carnegie since 1995.
- Putin Has Fought His Way Into a CornerIn The Media
- How Long Russians Will Believe in Fairy Tale?Commentary
Lilia Shevtsova
Recent Work
Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie India
- India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?Commentary
On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.
Konark Bhandari
- The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil ImportsCommentary
This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.
Vrinda Sahai
- Military Lessons from Operation SindoorArticle
The India-Pakistan conflict that played out between May 6 and May 10, 2025, offers several military lessons. This article presents key takeaways from Operation Sindoor and breaks down how India’s preparations shaped the outcome and what more is needed to strengthen future readiness.
Dinakar Peri
- India and the Sovereignty Principle: The Disaggregation ImperativeBook
This book offers a comprehensive analysis of India's evolving relationship with sovereignty in a complex global order. Moving beyond conventional narratives, it examines how the sovereignty principle shapes India's behavior across four critical domains—from traditional military power to contemporary data governance.
Rudra Chaudhuri, Nabarun Roy
- NISAR Soars While India-U.S. Tariff Tensions SimmerCommentary
On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.
Tejas Bharadwaj