[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning again, everyone. It appears that things may have taken a turn in Russia's war on Ukraine this week. On Tuesday, drones attacked Moscow, the first time residential areas were targeted in the Russian capital since its invasion of Ukraine 15 months ago. The next day, heavy shelling was reported in Russia's regions bordering Ukraine. That same day, drones attacked two oil refineries just 50 miles east of Russia's largest oil export terminals, that according to Reuters. Three attacks inside Russia within 24 hours. Now, Russia is, of course, accusing Ukraine and the West for the attacks.

Kyiv for its part has denied involvement, but told the news organization France 24 that it predicts more of these kinds of strikes in the future, tongue-in-cheek perhaps. This comes as Ukraine enters "a new phase of the war" according to an NBC interview with a senior advisor to President Zelenskyy. Zelenskyy has also reiterated his stance on joining both the European nations and NATO in recent meetings with NATO leaders. Joining us now to put it all in context is Andrew D'Anieri, an assistant director at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, where he facilitates the Center's work on Ukraine, Central Asia, and Russia. Andrew, thanks for joining us. Welcome to WNYC.

Andrew D'Anieri: Thanks very much for having me. Good to be here.

Brian Lehrer: From what I'm seeing, Kyiv has not yet commented on the drone attack in Moscow per se, or on Wednesdays incidents in Belgorod and Krasnodar. We'll talk about those very interesting ones. What do we know about the attacks? Who may have been behind them?

Andrew D'Anieri: It's very interesting because this does fit in with a pattern of Ukraine maintaining, shall we say, strategic ambiguity. Of course, Kyiv hasn't claimed responsibility for any drone attacks, or any previous attacks on oil refineries, or depots, or weapons stocks within Russian borders. Although those strikes, we have seen some of those over the course of this 15-month now long, full-scale war after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The most significant of these, I think is this drone attack on Moscow, where you had a small swarm, really of small drones flying from the southwest and the west towards Moscow that hits a few residential apartment buildings.

Many were shot down by Russian air defense, but some did strike some targets there. We don't know exactly whether those were the intended targets, but it's notable that Putin responded not with nuclear threats as he typically does, but this time called these attacks terrorism, which is one of two tropes we see from Vladimir Putin, obviously forgetting that he has been waging a war of terror on Ukraine for the past 15 months in civilian areas. To touch on the second piece, you mentioned there are these incursions into southern Russia bordering Ukraine.

These look to be carried out by what's really a Russian militia group called the Free Russia Legion. They've engaged these small incursions just along the Russian border there with Ukraine, where they go into these small towns, claim territory, and really make a big show of things. I think the significant piece here is that Putin, who is in charge of a massive police state in this massive country in Russia, doesn't have a monopoly on force anymore in the country.

Brian Lehrer: You're telling us that there's a militia group called the Free Russia Legion, which is an anti-Putin militia?

Andrew D'Anieri: There's actually not a whole lot that we can say for sure about this group, but what we do know is this is a small group made up of Russians that is stated anti-Kremlin. They don't like Putin. They want a new future for Russia, and this is how they're going about that.

Brian Lehrer: What would Kyiv get out of attacking Moscow with drones in residential areas? My understanding is there have been no casualties reported from those drone strikes, correct me if I'm wrong. If it started to happen, it changes the narrative a little bit from Ukraine as a country that has only been invaded and is only on the defensive, if they are, in fact launching strikes that could kill or injure civilians in the capital of Russia.

Andrew D'Anieri: Again, I think it's important to emphasize that we don't know who's responsible for these most recent drone attacks, especially, but I do think in the net, we can see two effects on Russia. Number one, it distracts some amount of attention, both military and public opinion, public media coverage from Russia's incursions and invasion of Ukraine in the east and in the south, where they still hold a good bit of territory and Russian-occupied Crimea.

It shifts attention and shifts resources away from those war efforts, and forces Moscow to think quite literally about the security of its own capital and its own people a little bit more. Related to that, just very quickly, is that when drones are flying in apartment buildings in the capital of your country, you'd be inclined to feel less safe than you would when the war is just on TV and hundreds of miles away.

Brian Lehrer: I guess so. Listeners with ties to Russia and/or Ukraine, we can take some of what you're hearing from people over there about the state of this war, or anybody can call with a question 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, or text a question at that same number right now as we do this update on the war in Ukraine with a lot going on this week. For all the focus on the attacks in Russia this week, there have also been all these reports of an anticipated Ukrainian spring counteroffensive. Here we are in June already. Has this spring counteroffensive ever actually started?

Andrew D'Anieri: This spring counteroffensive, it's been talked about really for months now. I think in some ways, we can see that it may have already begun. We had President Zelenskyy, earlier this week, claiming and really declaring that decisions have been made in Kyiv. There's going to be troop movements, and that certain operations are starting. I do think that we'll see more developments in a more open way pretty soon. This really, I think will be focused in the east, in the Donbas area, south of Bakhmut, which is also in that region, which has been the center of lots of fighting through the winter months, and possibly also in the south near Kherson and towards Russian-occupied Crimea.

Brian Lehrer: For all the focus on the drone attack in Moscow, Russia launched approximately 20 missile and drone attacks on the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv since the start of May. What do officials believe is Russia's aim? Is it to derail any potential Ukrainian counteroffensive? Can striking Kyiv even do that?

Andrew D'Anieri: Well, this is Moscow's problem really is their military forces have been so degraded over the past 15 months. They've lost in total casualties probably 200,000 soldiers. They just don't have really much weaponry, or trained manpower to be effective in advancing in eastern and in southern Ukraine. Really, what's left for Moscow is to rain drones and various rocket attacks on Ukrainian cities and civilian areas to try to air over the winter to cut power.

We saw Russian rockets aimed at energy infrastructure to basically try to freeze Ukrainians out in the dark over the course of a long, cold winter. That didn't work. Russia is still continuing with that strategy, possibly in an effort to wear down Ukrainian air defenses, and to make things even worse for Ukrainians in the capital city of Kyiv and in other cities in central, southern, and eastern Ukraine.

Brian Lehrer: Let's take a caller. Here's Victoria in Holmdel, New Jersey, you're on WNYC. Hi, Victoria.

Victoria: Hi. Can you hear me okay?

Brian Lehrer: Can hear just fine. Hey, there.

Victoria: Hi. I'm from Kyiv. I still have family in Kyiv. My cousins, specifically, one of them lives on the 17th floor of an apartment building that hasn't had electricity or water [inaudible 00:09:43]. They're in their 50s now. The damage that's being done all across Ukraine and now in Kyiv, there's just no end in sight. I do not know whether these attacks incursions into Russia are ultimately a good idea. Who's responsible for this? I think, necessary [inaudible 00:10:10] by the people in the country because I don't know what can be done from outside of it by us, by anyone else.

Brian Lehrer: I'm curious if you yourself, or people you know in Kyiv are starting to want some kind of negotiated settlement that involves territorial compromise, maybe in Crimea or something like that, or if overwhelmingly they're still staunchly in support of continuing to fight this war, take whatever losses they have to take in order to withstand the Russian invasion and repel it.

Victoria: I'm going to answer you in the following way. My cousins and I, and I have cousins all over the world because we're immigrants. We share one language, and that's Russian. I do not speak Ukrainian very well, I don't even understand it that well. My cousins [inaudible 00:11:10] Ukrainian to speak Russian to me, to anybody. Language is a whole other conversation and a huge topic [inaudible 00:11:21]

However, no, there is no settlement. We're going to win. That is the sense, that is the desire, and that is the only thing that's going to drive people. The minute we start talking about compromises, you're going to take steam out of the people who are living despite a nightmare. They're living in a nightmare.

Brian Lehrer: Victoria, thank you very much for your call. We really appreciate it, so do our guest, Andrew D'Anieri from the Atlanta Council. What were you thinking as you listened to Victoria? Do you think a negotiated settlement, which more people and more countries seem to be talking about, but of course, they're not Ukrainian and they don't have their lives and their territory and their democratic integrity at stake? There's more talk about this. How do you see what's going on?

Andrew D'Anieri: Just listening to the caller who called in, I think it's absolutely right that Ukrainians almost across the board do want to continue fighting, do really believe that they'll be victorious. The consolidation of Ukrainian public opinion over the last 15 months is really incredible, and it's almost entirely for the good. If you look at polling data across various organizations through the past year plus, 95% of Ukrainians want to keep fighting, and believe that they will win and defeat Russia. That's really the reality for Ukrainians who are bearing the brunt of that attacks from Russia, excuse me, that things are very difficult.

There are rockets raining down in major cities, there are drone attacks, and that's not to mention the brutality of war on the front lines. They do want to continue fighting because this is their livelihood, this is their lives, this is their culture, this is their country that's on the line. I think just on the point of peace agreements and a peace settlement, I'm actually not sure if we're even at the high points of other countries calling for a peaceful settlement.

I think we've actually passed that point. When we see this Ukrainian counteroffensive, we'll see how successful they can be. That will tell us a lot towards the future trajectory of the war. I do think the more that Western countries can send military aid as quickly as possible, that dramatically ups the chances of Ukraine being successful, and being further along on the path to victory.

Brian Lehrer: There are also diplomatic developments right now. I see that in Oslo today, secretary of State, Antony Blinken is there meeting with NATO foreign ministers from various NATO countries. Informally meeting about the prospect of adding both Ukraine and Sweden to NATO, though Turkey has opposed and obstructed that prospect for months now. Leaders will officially meet again in Lithuania next month, and want to do what they call resolve the standoff, at least over Sweden by then, all this according to the New York Times.

This is one of the things that Vladimir Putin said he was fighting for in the first place, invading Ukraine in the first place to stop the West from drawing in Ukraine to a military alliance on Russia's border. Why would Ukraine be trying to join NATO at this time? Why would NATO be trying to recruit Ukraine?

Andrew D'Anieri: Look, I think the first thing we have to understand is that Putin's claims about going to war in Ukraine over the supposed expansion of NATO is really nonsense. We saw Finland just last month get fully admitted to NATO, which Finland shares a hundreds-mile-long border with Russia. What was the reaction from Moscow? Basically nothing. It's when Ukraine attempts to continue on its Euro-Atlantic path that's towards NATO, that's toward the EU, that's toward greater relations with the US, and many of its partners in Europe, that's when Moscow really reacts.

We've seen the violence and terror that they've gone through with over the past year plus. The idea that it's NATO expansion that's driving Russian aggression, I think is a false one. It's really the fact that Ukraine rejected the so-called Russian world led by Putin. That's why we see this lashing out and this terrible war because Putin wants to control Ukraine, and Ukrainians want nothing to do with him.

Brian Lehrer: It does seem from the New York Times reporting that some of the other NATO members are more eager to have Ukraine actually join, but secretary Blinken on behalf of the United States took a more cautious approach to that. Is that your understanding? Why would the US have more reservations than some of the European NATO countries?

Andrew D'Anieri: Look, the upcoming summit on NATO in Vilnius is in just over a month here. To admit one country into NATO is a really, really long and complex process. Ukraine's not going to get in by July. That's just the fact of it. Finland had the smoothest ride of any recent NATO-admitted country, and it took over a year really for their process to go through. Sweden is a strong candidate as well, but you do need consensus from all 31 members of NATO. That's why the holdup with Turkey is so significant.

Ukraine is not going to get in this year, but I do think we'll see, and we should see some amount of substantive commitments from the US and its NATO allies toward a concrete path toward Ukraine in NATO. That could include formalizing some of these ad hoc security agreements and security provisions of military aid that we've seen in the past year plus. That would be a significant step forward.

Brian Lehrer: What's the story with Sweden? I think a lot of Americans may hear some of these Americans who don't follow foreign policy all that much and think, "Wait, Finland wasn't already a member of NATO? Sweden wasn't already a member of NATO?"

Andrew D'Anieri: Sure. There's lots of overlap on these European institutions and Atlantic institutions that it's not always easy to keep track. The cliff notes here is Turkey is a member of NATO, and to get into NATO you need consensus from all NATO member states to admit a new country. Turkey is playing up concerns over a political group in Sweden that's now possibly being designated as an extremist or a terrorist group that Turkey says harbors some anti-Turkish, excuse me, positions. That's their stated reservation.

I think it's difficult to get into the mind of President Erdogan, who just won a new term earlier this week in the runoff election. It seems to me like a strategic point for Turkey in which Ankara, the capital really wants to see what concessions it can get for itself in these NATO recession negotiations. I do think that while these holdups are serious, Sweden has made some progress in addressing them. I do think they'll get resolved in the short to medium term, and Sweden will join NATO at some point soon.

Brian Lehrer: For those same listeners, curious but not so knowledgeable about some of this foreign policy, who may have heard that answer and thought, "Wait, Sweden and Finland they're in Europe, not in NATO, but Turkey is? Isn't Turkey a Middle Eastern country overwhelmingly Muslim, which puts it culturally and politically in a different group?"

Andrew D'Anieri: This is the interesting thing about NATO, whereas the European Union is really in Europe, as the name would suggest. NATO spans the Atlantic Ocean, which includes the US certainly, most notably in fact, and does include Turkey, which has a significant army and military. NATO being primarily really has defensive security Alliance, having Turkey as a NATO ally, is significant for the Alliance. That's one of the reasons why they are in the Alliance.

Brian Lehrer: One more call. Brigitte in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hello, Brigitte.

Brigitte: Hi. Let me rectify something. Turkey has a European side and an Asian side.

Brian Lehrer: Correct.

Brigitte: That might be one of the reasons why they joined NATO. Second point, I am really upset because I have this show on Christiane Amanpour last night, and I'm really upset about the Turkey fighting considering the PKK terrorist organization, which is not. They have persecuted the Kurds for the longest time. I was there in 1970, and they were already persecuting the Kurds. They are not a terrorist organization.

They won their independence, and that's something else. That's another point. Now, the point I want to make is, last night they were talking about several European nations, they're all saying, "No, Ukraine should not join NATO right away because they are still at war." Let's say if Ukraine join NATO now, that will involve NATO into the conflict automatically because of Article 5.

Brian Lehrer: I'm going to leave it there Brigitte because we're running out of time, but that's a very important question. Article 5 of NATO does commit each NATO country to the defense of the other. If Ukraine was suddenly to become a member, what would the United States, for example, be obligated to, in addition to providing the weapons and other support that it's providing now?

Andrew D'Anieri: Brian, yes. If I could just add, I think Article 5 is the most important article of the NATO charter. Article 5 actually, in the actual wording of it, does not require member states to come to the immediate military defense of one of the allies in terms of force. It provides for support and defense in some way, essentially. I think actually, if Ukraine were admitted to NATO immediately, that really NATO country support wouldn't look all that different.

It would formalize some of these security apparatuses or formalize some of these aid processes to Ukraine, and might even speed up some of the aid that we're currently sending to Ukraine, which would be a good thing, but it wouldn't immediately as people are worried about. It wouldn't immediately mean that NATO is at war with Russia. That's a common misconception about NATO and about Article 5.

Brian Lehrer: There we leave it with Andrew D'Anieri, assistant director of the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center. Thanks so much for coming on, and updating us on what's going on with the invasion of Ukraine.

Andrew D'Anieri: Thanks, Brian. We appreciate it.

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.