Commentary
In Ukraine, Gaza, and Iran, AI warfare has come to dominate, with barely any oversight or accountability. Europe must lead the charge on the responsible use of new military technologies.
Raluca Csernatoni
{
"authors": [
"Dmitri Trenin",
"Eugene Rumer"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
"programAffiliation": "russia",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Russia",
"Eastern Europe",
"Ukraine"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
What's Next in Ukraine and Syria for the US and Russia?
Putin interprets the victory of the Maidan in Ukraine as a victory of anti-Russian and pro-Western forces. He is very concerned about the possibility of having an anti-Russian state right on the Russian border.
Published on Mar 3, 2014
Source: KCRW’s To the Point
If Russia does intend to forcefully take control of Crimea, it would violate international laws on territorial integrity. Already, the western powers have threatened various ways to isolate Russia diplomatically and economically. Does Vladimir Putin care?
Carnegie’s Eugene Rumer and Dmitri Trenin spoke about the recent developments in Ukraine on KCRW’s To the Point. They were joined by Will Englund of the Washington Post and P. J. Crowley of the George Washington University.
Trenin argued that Russia has switched gears in a dramatic way during the past ten days, moving from moderate reactions to deep involvement in the Ukrainian conflict. This change of policy is a result of Putin’s reassessment of the situation: now he seems to interpret the victory of the Maidan as a victory of anti-Russian forces. Putin does not only fear to lose Ukraine as a good neighbor that can be influenced, Trenin added, but to have an anti-Russian state right on the Russian border.
Rumer said that Ukraine’s close relations with Russia and with the EU seem to be mutually exclusive for Putin, who looks at the world from a zero-sum perspective. Now Ukraine made it clear that it still want to vigorously pursue the path of European integration. Thus, Rumer noted, Putin has calculated the risks and the costs and figured out that getting hold of Crimea and letting Ukraine go west is worth the price of taking actions on the peninsula.
About the Authors
Dmitri Trenin
Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
Trenin was director of the Carnegie Moscow Center from 2008 to early 2022.
Eugene Rumer
Director and Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program
Rumer, a former national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the U.S. National Intelligence Council, is a senior fellow and the director of Carnegie’s Russia and Eurasia Program.
Carnegie 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 Endowment for International Peace
- The Fog of AI War
- The Shadow of the Military in Modern South AsiaArticle
Military rule is now a defining political factor in South Asia. Here’s how analysts can understand and account for it.
Paul Staniland
- Will Hungary’s New Leader Really Change EU Policy on Russia and Ukraine?Commentary
Orbán created an image for himself as virtually the only opponent of aid to Ukraine in the entire EU. But in reality, he was simply willing to use his veto to absorb all the backlash, allowing other opponents to remain in the shadows.
Maksim Samorukov
- How to Join the EU in Three Easy StepsCommentary
Montenegro and Albania are frontrunners for EU enlargement in the Western Balkans, but they can’t just sit back and wait. To meet their 2030 accession ambitions, they must make a strong positive case.
Dimitar Bechev, Iliriana Gjoni
- India’s Oil Security Strategy: Structural Vulnerabilities and Strategic ChoicesArticle
This piece argues that the present Indian strategy, based on opportunistic diversification and utilization of limited strategic reserves, remains inadequate when confronting supply disruptions. It evaluates India’s options in the short, medium, and long terms.
Vrinda Sahai
