Putin may be bluffing, but it is important for Ukraine to regain territory before a potential Trump re-election, Francis Fukuyama tells Deutsche Welle.
THE Francis Fukuyama, Professor of Political Science at the American Stanford University, he became more widely known with his book “The End of History”, which was published in 1992. Today he is considered one of the leading intellectuals of his generation.
At the end of June, the Russian authorities banned him from entering the country. Recently it became known that he participates in the Scientific Council of the Russian “Foundation for Combating Corruption”, founded by the imprisoned dissident Andrei Navalny. Followed by interview by Francis Fukuyama in Deutsche Welle.
DW: You are now one of the persons banned from entering Russia. How do you feel about that?
Francis Fukuyama: I am honored to be on this list. All the major foreign critics of Russia and the Russian invasion of Ukraine are on the list, and I was basically wondering how it took so long for my name to be included.
Why did you decide to join the Scientific Council of the International Anti-Corruption Foundation?
I am a big fan of Alexei Navalny, I met him in Warsaw in 2019. Corruption is a huge problem in Russia and around the world and I am happy to support this foundation in any way I can.
Putin’s bluffs and Ukraine’s interest
“We’ve only just begun,” Putin said recently, referring to the war in Ukraine. Is he bluffing?
I think he is lying, as he is on many other issues. Western military analysts who examine the disposition of Russian forces note that Russia suffers from a severe manpower shortage. He has also lost about a third of the military force he originally mustered to subdue Ukraine. Estimates of Russian casualties have not been confirmed, but one possible estimate is that 20,000 people were killed and another 60,000 wounded. Not to mention the prisoners of war. For a country the size of Russia it is pretty much a disaster in the military field. So I guess, given that the Russians have gained very little ground since they started focusing on Donbass, they don’t have much in reserve either. And I think Putin is bluffing when he says it hasn’t even started.
Which strategy do you think would be appropriate for Ukraine?
Currently the most realistic strategy is to focus on the South, restore Ukraine’s access to the Black Sea by recapturing Kherson and other ports on the Sea of ​​Azov. This is more important than Donbass. I think the plan to recapture Donbas will be difficult to implement in the coming months. By late summer we could see some progress in the South. It is really important for Ukraine to regain this access so that it can export all its agricultural products through the Black Sea ports and break the Russian blockade in Odessa.
What would change in the whole situation, in case of re-election of Trump?
If Donald Trump comes back in 2024, that would solve all of Russia’s problems, because apparently he himself is seeking to withdraw the US from NATO. Just with this change in American policy alone, Russia will have achieved its main goals. And that’s why I think it’s really important for Ukraine to make some progress and regain the momentum of military operations over the summer, because the unity of the West is based on the world’s expectation that there will be a military solution to the problem in due time.
If the world gets the sense that we are facing a prolonged stalemate, then I believe that unity will be at risk and there will be more calls for Ukraine to cede territory to end the war.
There is no comparison between the US and China
How do you see Russia in a broader perspective? What kind of political status does it have?
Currently I think it looks more like Nazi Germany than anything else. Its only ideology is a kind of extreme nationalism, but less developed than that of the Nazis. Also, this is a regime with a poorly developed institutional character. Everything revolves around one person, Vladimir Putin, who really controls all the levers of power.
If you compare it to China, it is something completely different. China has a large Communist Party with 90 million members and highly developed internal discipline. There are no such institutions in Russia. So I don’t think it’s a stable regime. I don’t think he has a clear ideology that he signals to the outside. I think it’s just aimed at people who, for different reasons, don’t like the West.
After 30 years, what would you add to your list of the end of history?
The situation today is different than 30 years ago, while Democracy has retreated on all fronts, even in the US, India and other large, democratic countries in recent years. But the development of the story was never linear. We had major relapses in the 30s, which we survived. We had another series of relapses in the 70s with the oil crisis and inflation in many parts of the world. So, the idea of ​​historical progress is not dead.
There are relapses from time to time, but institutions and ideas remain strong. They have survived for a long time and I believe they will continue to survive.
Are the war in Ukraine or other ongoing crises overshadowing our effort to focus on the more global and dangerous crisis of climate change?
Apparently short-term energy needs have led to a revival of fossil fuels and are delaying efforts to reduce emissions. But this is a temporary retreat. And I think that both of these issues should be resolved simultaneously, there is no question of choosing one or the other. But the climate crisis manifests itself slowly, it will continue to be with us for generations to come. So I don’t think our retreat today will necessarily be our final position on this issue.
View the news feed and get the latest news.
