At a time when President Zelensky is suggesting a rethink in Ukraine’s quest to join NATO and its relationship with the Donbas region and when, separately, President Xi Jinping of China has been talking to the French President and German Chancellor about the crisis in Ukraine, Professor Srinath Raghavan has said that China could play a role mediating the crisis between Russia and Ukraine and if it does so, he added, “This would be it’s 1965 moment”, a reference to the role played by Russia in the Indo-Pakistan crisis of that year.

Raghavan said he does not believe that the outcome of the present crisis will lead to Putin being pushed from power but he does believe that Putin will be weaker and more insecure.

In a 44-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Raghavan, who is Professor of History and International Relations at Ashoka University and a Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, disagreed with the view that we are seeing a new cold war, perhaps framed by President Biden’s view of a global contest between democracies and autocracies, with Russia and China on one side and Europe and America on the other. In the interview he explains in detail why he takes this view.

In the interview Raghavan also discusses in detail the nature of the relationship between China and Russia and, more importantly, the limitations to this relationship and where their interests diverge.

In the interview Raghavan also discusses both how the Ukraine crisis has been a “shot in the arm” for NATO but also how differences can emerge between Europe and America over issues such as oil and gas sanctions against Russia as well as the burden of Ukrainian refugees, which will fall entirely on Europe and within Europe far more on Ukraine’s neighbours than on richer countries like France, Britain or even Germany.

A substantial part of the interview is a discussion about Germany’s decision to dramatically increase its defence expenditure which, Raghavan points out, was a commitment Germany made in 2004 as well but did not live up to. He suggests that something similar could be the outcome this time again.

The interview also discusses President Putin’s threat to use nuclear weapons which Raghavan says, from Putin’s point of view, is “rational” and it has clearly served its purpose of ensuring that Europe does not impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine.

The interview discusses the belief that the Russian military performance in Ukraine has been below par and below expectations. It also focuses on an assessment from The Economist that “Russia’s initial slow progress in Ukraine is also prompting NATO to re-assess its adversary’s capabilities.”

Finally, the interview discusses two likely outcomes of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

First, if Russia gets bogged down and second, if Russia is victorious but economically wounded. In this context, there’s also a discussion on Russia’s demands (Ukraine must give up its desire to join NATO and accept neutrality, independence for the Donbas region and recognition of Crimea as Russian territory) to which Raghavan adds another, which he believes is a consequence of the crisis, the full lifting of the sanctions imposed against Russia. Raghavan comments on the extent to which these demands will be met. His belief is that they will not be met fully. But there are ways in which they can be met that could give Russia a face-saving exit.

Watch the full interview here.

This article went live on March ninth, two thousand twenty two, at fifty-nine minutes past three in the afternoon.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.