Former CIA Russia Analyst Discusses Ukraine War and US-Russia Relations

George Beebe, former CIA Russia analyst and current director of grand strategy at the Quincy Institute, recently shared his insights on the Ukraine war and US-Russia relations in an interview with Alexander Mercouris and Glen Diesen.

The Post-Cold War Peace

Beebe began by discussing why the post-Cold War peace fell apart between Russia and the West. He noted there were different visions between the two sides:

• Russia wanted to build a "common European home" that was inclusive of Russia while allowing for diverse political and economic approaches.

• The US wanted Russia to fundamentally transform itself to become like Western liberal democracies as a basis for integration.

Beebe said the US was intent on transforming Russia throughout the 1990s, which led to economic collapse and a plummeting life expectancy in Russia. This created distrust, with some Russians viewing it as an intentional effort to weaken their country.

Additionally, US support for nationalist groups in former Soviet states was seen by Russia as a security threat, as these groups tended to be anti-Russian.

Key Turning Points

Beebe identified several key events that damaged US-Russia relations:

• The 1999 NATO intervention in Kosovo, which Russia saw as illegal and offensive. This raised fears NATO could take similar action against Russia.

• US withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002.

• NATO's eastward expansion, which Russia viewed as threatening despite US assurances.

• Western support for "color revolutions" in former Soviet states, seen by Russia as US-backed regime change efforts.

Challenges in Understanding Russia

Beebe emphasized the importance of empathy in foreign policy analysis - being able to understand other countries' perspectives without necessarily agreeing with them. He noted this has been lacking in Western approaches to Russia.

He said the US developed "bad habits" after the Cold War, with a sense of triumphalism leading to less willingness to engage in normal diplomatic give-and-take. The US relied more on coercion, believing it could impose its views due to its power advantage.

Beebe argued this approach is now counterproductive, as the power gap has narrowed. He said the US needs to rebuild its diplomatic capabilities and engage more in balancing interests.

The Ukraine War

Regarding the current war in Ukraine, Beebe outlined three possible outcomes:

1. Escalation into direct US/NATO-Russia conflict (which he views as disastrous)

2. Ukrainian collapse, leading to Russia securing defensible lines but not occupying all of Ukraine

3. A diplomatic compromise

Beebe believes the second scenario of Ukrainian collapse is currently most likely, though not Russia's preferred outcome. He said this could create an unstable "security black hole" in Europe.

He argued the US needs to redefine success in more realistic terms, focusing on preserving Ukraine as a functioning independent state rather than inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia.

Path to Peace

Beebe emphasized that resolving the Ukraine conflict requires addressing both the bilateral Russia-Ukraine issues and the broader geopolitical competition over European security architecture.

He said the US needs to recognize Russia has some legitimate security interests at stake, while also acknowledging that many principles underpinning European security are in tension with each other (e.g. territorial integrity vs. self-determination).

Beebe believes high-level US-Russia engagement is necessary to make progress, similar to during the Cold War. He expressed frustration that more diplomatic steps weren't taken before the invasion to prevent war.

Changing Global Order

Beebe contextualized the conflict within broader shifts in the global balance of power. He said the post-Cold War period where the US could unilaterally set and enforce global rules is ending, as the power gap with countries like China and Russia has narrowed.

He argued the US needs to recognize changed circumstances and negotiate an approach that preserves key aspects of the post-WWII order while accounting for other powers' interests and increased capabilities.

Beebe pushed back on the notion that Russia and China want a rules-free "wild west" system. Rather, he believes they want a return to earlier conceptions of the post-war order, rejecting a US-dominated system where America can unilaterally dictate or suspend rules.

Prospects for Diplomacy

While uncertain about specific terms Russia might accept, Beebe believes some things are clearly unacceptable to Moscow, like Ukrainian NATO membership. He said a US military presence in Ukraine would make Russia very nervous given the high level of mistrust.

However, Beebe expressed some optimism that the US may be moving toward engaging Russia diplomatically, noting recent statements by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin praising Ukraine's achievements in a way that could set the stage for talks.

Ultimately, Beebe emphasized the need for negotiations to address both immediate Ukraine issues and broader European security concerns. He believes this is essential to avoid the "grim alternatives" of continued conflict or unstable frozen conflict scenarios.

Conclusion

George Beebe's analysis highlights the complex historical and geopolitical factors underlying the Ukraine conflict. He makes a compelling case for renewed US-Russia diplomacy to prevent further escalation and instability in Europe.

While critical of past US approaches, Beebe offers a pragmatic vision for redefining success and working toward compromises that could preserve key Western interests while addressing Russia's core security concerns.

His insights underscore the broader implications of the Ukraine war for the changing global order. As relative power shifts, Beebe argues the US must adapt its approach to maintain stability and advance its interests in a more multipolar world.

Ultimately, Beebe's perspective suggests that creative diplomacy and a clearer understanding of all sides' interests will be essential to resolve the Ukraine crisis and build a more stable European security architecture for the long term.

Article created from: https://youtu.be/ye0THfJDHQc?feature=shared