The Political Scene | The New Yorker

Episode: Should Biden Push for Regime Change in Russia?
Date: October 2, 2023
Host: David Remnick
Guest: Stephen Kotkin (Historian, Senior Fellow at Hoover Institution, Stanford University)

Episode Overview

This episode of The Political Scene features a conversation between David Remnick and historian Stephen Kotkin on the state of the war in Ukraine, the prospects for victory, the limitations and contradictions of Western strategy, and the fraught question: Should the Biden administration push for regime change in Russia? Throughout the episode, they explore the human, political, and strategic dimensions of the war, comparing it to historical precedents and discussing the impact on American and European politics.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

The State of the War in Ukraine

• Ukraine's Depleting Resources:

  • Ukraine is facing severe shortages of personnel and munitions. The average age of soldiers training outside Ukraine is now 35 or older, signifying a depletion of younger recruits.
    • Stephen Kotkin: “They're running out of 18 to 30 year olds. The average age of the Ukrainian soldiers training in Europe at the bases in Germany or the UK is 35 or older. They're running out of munitions, they're running out of anti aircraft missiles. That's a really big one too.” (02:40)

• Comparison of Losses:

  • Ukrainian casualties are massive but unreleased; Russian losses are also high, but the Kremlin shows little concern for them, shifting the moral and operational burden.
    • Kotkin: “The guy in the Kremlin doesn’t care. Ukrainian soldiers die. They live in a democracy, their leadership cares. They can’t just sacrifice their people in big numbers. The guy in the Kremlin, he doesn’t care.” (03:44)

The Counteroffensive’s Mixed Results

• Progress and Limitations

  • The West expects regular, tangible victories, paralleling stock market "quarterly numbers," despite the war’s long-haul nature.
    • Kotkin: “The Biden administration, our European partners, Ukrainians themselves, talk about how they're in it for the long haul, they're in it for the long term. And then they go to a press conference and the first question is, you know, what are the quarterlies..." (04:34)
  • There's skepticism about any clear, quick end: “Why do you think it's gonna end?” (04:34)

• Tet Offensive Parallel (Vietnam War, 1968):

  • Kotkin worries Russia could replicate a "Tet Offensive"—a surprise counterstrike that shocks the West politically and undermines support, even if it fails militarily.
    • Kotkin: “Their offensive could work… However, they could be surprised by a Russian counteroffensive, which doesn't have to succeed very much on the battlefield. It could be just like Tet… But it could send political shockwaves through Washington D.C., through European capitals, Tokyo.” (06:33)

Western Strategy: Contradictions and Credibility Gap

• Rhetoric vs. Commitment:

  • The West’s maximalist rhetoric ("everything at stake") is inconsistent with its refusal to put troops on the ground in Ukraine, creating confusion domestically and among allies.
    • Kotkin: “You can't have everything at stake existential for the world order...But it's not important enough to put American troops on the ground in Ukraine. That's our strategy. That's why Americans don't understand our strategy.” (10:09)
  • In Ukraine, the stakes are existential and maximalist: victory, justice, reparations, but these are disconnected from Western support levels.

• Aid Fatigue and Political Dynamics:

  • Domestic politics in the US and Europe (e.g., aid skepticism among Republicans, Polish election-year tensions over grain exports) jeopardize ongoing Ukrainian support.
    • Remnick: “You're starting to see many people in the Republican Party question aid to Ukraine completely, not least Donald Trump.” (16:57)
    • Kotkin: “This is not something that we're going to be able to succeed the next 20 years at $200 million a day from the US alone, as well as our European part.” (17:36)

Finding a Path Forward: Negotiations, Armistice, and Realpolitik

• Armistice as the Only Viable Endgame:

  • Kotkin argues for seeking an armistice (a Korean Peninsula model), even if it leaves significant territory with Russia, to stop the destruction and begin rebuilding Ukraine.
    • Kotkin: “We need an armistice. We need a DMZ, we need the fighting to stop. We need the 18 to 30 year old Ukrainians who are left not to die.” (13:56)

• The Crimea and Donbas Quandary:

  • Retaking Crimea poses massive demographic and legal challenges, especially with a majority Russian population and EU accession on the line.
    • Kotkin: “If you take back Crimea, what do you do with the Russians? There were 2.3 million people in Crimea...Predominantly ethnic Russian... What are you going to do? You're going to ethnically cleanse them?.. How's that going to work for your EU accession?” (15:03)

Should the West Push for Regime Change in Moscow?

• A Call for Harder Pressure:

  • Kotkin suggests the West should make Putin personally insecure—putting the threat of regime change "back on the table" could force real negotiations.
    • Kotkin: “My argument is we took regime change off the table through fear of escalation. We said we're not going to do covert operations, political stuff to threaten your regime in Moscow...that's the key to forcing an armistice.” (12:15)
    • Kotkin: “I want to grab Putin by the throat and I want to make life uncomfortable for him politically...Let them [defectors] fly out...get him to the hog [The Hague]...Let's pressure this regime. Let's push and push and push…” (19:59)

• Debate Over the Consequences:

  • Kotkin calls for an open, full debate on the risks and rewards of targeting regime change: “If you don't agree, let's at least debate that. I want a fulsome debate about that, about why we're not doing it and what might be the consequences if we do do it.” (22:56)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Logic of Western Support:

  • “You can’t have everything at stake existential for the world order... But it’s not important enough to put American troops on the ground in Ukraine. That’s our strategy. That’s why Americans don’t understand our strategy.”
    • Stephen Kotkin, 10:09

• On Long-Term Viability of Aid:

  • “This is not something that we’re going to be able to succeed the next 20 years at $200 million a day from the US alone, as well as our European part.”
    • Stephen Kotkin, 17:36

• On Pressure vs. Security Dilemma:

  • “We took regime change off the table through fear of escalation...that’s the key to forcing an armistice, to getting a winning the peace conversation rather than just winning on the battlefield. When he’s scared that his regime could go down, he’ll cut and run.”
    • Stephen Kotkin, 12:15

• On Realpolitik vs. Morality:

  • “If you can’t march on Moscow, if your partners won’t put boots on the ground to impose that peace... then what do you do in that situation? It’s not something I’m happy about, but I got to get to a Ukraine that’s rebuilding, not being bombed and destroyed.”
    • Stephen Kotkin, 15:03

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Ukraine's Human & Material Losses: (02:40 – 04:28)
• Counteroffensive’s Progress & Public Perceptions: (04:34 – 06:09)
• Tet Offensive Analogy & Political Risk: (05:21 – 07:15)
• Western Strategy Contradictions: (10:09 – 12:11)
• Regime Change Debate: (12:15 – 13:41, 19:59 – 22:56)
• Negotiated Settlements and Armistice Concepts: (13:56 – 16:57)
• Aid Fatigue & Political Risks in the West: (16:57 – 19:30)
• Global Realignment, Strategic "Victories," and Next Moves: (19:30 – 23:01)

Conclusion

The episode offers a sobering assessment of Ukraine’s battlefield realities, the growing disconnect between Western rhetoric and resources, and the complicated geopolitics of the war. Kotkin pushes listeners — and policymakers — to consider tough trade-offs and the strategic necessity of pressuring Putin’s regime more directly, while Remnick anchors the discussion in current Western political dynamics. The prevailing tone is urgent, realistic, and at times, distinctly skeptical about long-term Western resolve unless strategies and conversations change.