While almost no one anticipated a Crimean invasion, almost
everyone predicted a coming Russian invasion of the Eastern Ukraine. All the
signs were there, including Putin´s own comments about “New Russia.”  Non-nationalist websites have been blocked in
Russia, and after the annexation of the Crimea, we witnessed the same
orgies of nationalism in Red Square, Moscow, that we saw when Hitler´s car
appeared at the Brandenburg Gate after the full occupation of Czechoslovakia.  

 But all of a sudden
things came to a pause!  Unexpectedly, the
Kremlin called U.S. President Barack Obama and at his request, another Geneva conference
was set up on April 17 to address de-escalation of the crisis. Four actors;
Russia, Ukraine, E U and U.S.  What
happened?   

Putin´s FSB (KGB successor) got wind of three new
developments.  1.  The European Parliament´s consideration of
energy sanctions that will hurt the Southstream pipeline.  2.  In
the U.S. Congress, the Republicans, led by Senator John McCain, are pushing for
lethal arms to Ukraine.  3.  Most importantly, the Ukrainian military
demonstrated it can fight.  All of these reasons relate
to the Kremlin´s perception of a much-increased cost of a further intervention.

  Exploded
by now is the myth that economic sanctions can modify Putin´s behavior.  Sanctions on high Kremlin colleagues and oligarch
banks were laughed off.     Despite the tumbles of the ruble and Russian
market,   Putin, has seemed unshaken. The result has
been the rise of the alternate myth that economic sanctions will not matter at
all.  Wrong!   

Russia has an Achilles heel.  With its extractive economy, Russia can be
posited as a giant gas station.    Roughly
half of its GNP is dependent upon gas and oil, which also account for 70% of
its exports.   Putin
has compensated for Russia´s lack of economic diversity by sewing up gas and
oil pipelines both in the Middle East and Europe, thus pressuring the EU.   However,
the oil and gas streams cut both ways.  Europe
needs the gas, but Putin needs the profits, and here energy economic sanctions, can make a difference.  

Since the 2004 Orange Revolution, and in
spite of Russian puppet Viktor Yanukovych´s return to power in 2010,  Putin has considered the Ukraine
unreliable.  Thus, even as he has tried
to block the building of alternate pipelines to European markets, he has also tried
to diversify GAZPROM gas  AND ROZNEFT oil
pipelines flows so as to avoid Ukraine.

In the north, Russia´s GAZPROM owns 51% of
Nordstream AG, the rest held by Germany and Holland. Chaired by former German
chancellor and Putin friend, Gerhard Schroder, the security of its completed pipelines
is not in question.  Perhaps the only
issue is whether NATO country Estonia will permit the exploration of new
Nordstream pipeline routes through its waters.  However, the Southstream pipeline, also 51%
owned by GAZPROM,  is a different
story.  It´s far from being
finished.  Originating in Russia and going
through the Black sea to the economic zones of Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary and
Slovenia to Italy, it could be put into jeopardy by  adverse changes in EU policy.  

And perhaps that has started to happen.  On April 16 the European Parliament was said to have  voted to terminate this project and slap
sanctions on Russia for its interventionist policies..   

Unsurprisingly, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
asked for an immediate meeting on April 17 in Geneva.  Four actors: 
Russia, Ukraine, U.S. and EU.  Did
Putin realize that if he went ahead with a large scale invasion of the Eastern
Ukraine the future of Southstream would  be at stake? 

Surely one of Putin´s reasons for annexing the Crimea
was to attain its bountiful oil and gas reserves.  He also knows that Yanukovych  signed  oil and gas exploration contracts with American
companies Exxon and Shell.  Putin surely
would like these contracts renegotiated in his favor-  That  will not happen if there is an invasion.

The second factor  is the military one.  Putin likes low cost invasions.  It´s not as though Russia´s economy is
exactly exuberant.  For a while it looked
like the rag tag, demoralized army of the Ukraine, penetrated by Russian
agents,  would not be able to repel
separatist activities in the nine large cities of the Eastern Ukraine.  Then there was President Obama´s taking all
military options off the table and being 
slow to beef up military hardware in Poland and the Baltics.

Yet, amidst grotesque reports of Russian separatists  not letting Ukrainian troops pass and even
taking over their motorized vehicles, and the Ukrainian forces  not being able to dislodge the separatists
from their strongholds,  there came what
might be a sudden turning point.  The  Ukrainian army showed it could fight.  On April 16, itrepelled an overnight attack of
300 separatists on their military base in the city of Mariupol.  The toll was three assailants dead, thirteen
wounded and more than 60
captured.

The episode showed that the Ukrainians deserve  U.S. military aid – anti-tank and
anti-aircraft weapon — to strengthen their defenses, and some American leaders
are calling for this.  After all, it
wouldn´t be the first time that America provided arms to Ukrainian
partisans.  They did it after WWII.  They did it for the Yugoslavs  through NATO member Italy, in 1949-52,  thus deterring Stalin´s intended invasion,
and during the Soviet-Afghanistan war, they helped the Afghan Muslim resistance
through  Pakistan.  

True, the results of the Geneva, April 17
temporary agreement on the de-escalation of the Crimea,  has so far not been able to resolve the
conflict in the Eastern Ukraine.  Moreover,
Russia´s deployment of its rapid response forces on the borders continues, as
does the refusal of  Russian-speaking
separatists to vacate their captured government buildings. Nor has Russia made
any great effort to pressure the separatists to depart. However, it would be
too simple to assume that Denis Pushilin, the 
president of the self-proclaimed, “People´s Republic  of Donetsk,” is just the stooge of Putin and
that Putin has total control of him or his followers.

Kiev must address the fact that the Eastern
Ukraine, is not just spiritually and culturally,  but also 
economically  linked with  Russia .  
Not only the oligarchs but also the managers and skilled workers in the
coal and steel industries of the East must be asking if integration with the EU
would not be harmful to local interests. 
They fear dislocations such as unemployment and factory closings. p.  Yet, the advantages of not living under  a dictatorship, having self-determination and
free access to the more advanced West are considerable.

Some may ask,
why has the U.S. been laggard in helping the Ukraine?   Americans generally dislike war,  but its leaders have also been slow to realize
the need to stand up to aggression.  U.S. vital national interests are
not directly threatened in the Ukraine, a non-member of NATO, but the  U.S has an important dog in this fight.  Putin´s interventionism  threatens not
just the regional stability involving  our NATO allies, but  the
entire world order.  If  Putin succeeds
in invading the Ukraine or neighboring Moldova, 
we will undoubtedly return to the Cold War between East and West,  with the potential for further escalation of
the conflict as happened in the horrible past. 

 If
not  challenged by America, other
 irredentist regimes  will follow Putin´s example of disregard for
international law; China has claims 
on  islands in the Far East,
Nicaragua lusts for part of Costa Rica for the building of a controversial
canal.  India and Pakistan are at odds
over Kashmir  and Azerbaijan and Armenia over,
Nagorny Karabach,   Even Russian
territorial integrity is threatened by separatists demands in Chechnya and
Dagestan .  As long as the military
buildup around the Ukraine is not dealt with, the U.S. should  supply 
arms to the Ukraine.

            The Ukrainians separatists  should be allowed a referendum assuring the linguistic
and civil rights of Russian speakers in the Ukraine.   There should also be active participation of
the Party of Regents in the forthcoming election. Incidentally, it appears that
this party does not agree with the continued separatist occupation of
government buildings.  However, NATO and
Kiev must be on guard, since the Russians are masters of maskirovka (deception).  The
May 25 elections represent a decision-making deadline for Putin – either to
accept a free Ukrainian state or continue the military intervention.  To avoid one, U.S. preventive diplomacy
should also provide some carrots for Putin. 
If he chooses to live with an independent Ukraine, energy sanctions
might  be lifted.  Moreover the U.S. and NATO can provide
guarantees to Putin that neither the Ukraine nor Georgia will join NATO.  In the long run, if Russia transcends into a
more democratic country, Ukraine and Russia together could apply for NATO
membership.  Moreover, OECC observers
could be asked to assess the demands of the Russian large minorities in Estonia
and Latvia as well as Ukraine.

 One
can observe that the deployment of  NATO
military assets in Estonia, Poland and Lithuania is slowly increasing.  American leaders on both sides of the aisle
are starting to call for arms to the Ukraine. 
 As Winston Churchill once put it,
You can always
count on Americans to do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else.

Leni Friedman Valenta is CEO of the Institute
of Post-Communist Studies and Terrorism (jvlv.net). Jiri Valenta is its president.  A longstanding member of the U.S. Council on
Foreign Relations, he is author and editor of numerous books dealing with
Russian interventionism.  @JiriLeniValenta on Twitter.