Yuri Felshtinsky: Putin needs Belarus to attack Baltic States

And to reach the borders of Poland and western Ukraine.

Historian Yuri Feshtinsky left the USSR in the 1970s. He obtained US citizenship and continued researching different periods of the Russian history of the 20th century. He told Politeka why Putin made a fatal mistake by choosing Ukraine for invasion.

– You said earlier that the Baltic States should fear a new attack most of all. Other people said it, too. What is the logic? Putin is likely to meet real resistance from NATO in this case. It would probably be better to launch a new attack on Finland if he wants to show his tanks.

– If we leave emotions aside and look at the events from the geopolitical or strategical point of view, the attack on Europe should have been started with Belarus. But Shoigu, let's say it straight, is not a great Russian commander. His main task is to be silent and look important. And he copes with it. He doesn't have other tasks. It's clear that the decision to seize Crimea was caused by the escape of Yanukovych. Putin tried to steal initiative. Of course, he achieved what he wanted. But the price for Crimea was too high, though it was minimum from Putin's point of view.

By taking the decision to seize Crimea instead of Belarus and invade eastern Ukraine, Putin lost strategically important approaches to the borders of Lithuania, Poland and western Ukraine. Of course, it he can fix it at any moment. Putin's plan includes Belarus. Before or after the Baltic States? I think before. The concentration of forces in Kaliningrad region only has sense if an attack from mainland Russia is planned. Attacking the Baltic States from Kaliningrad has no sense from the military point of view, because NATO will close the pincers on Kaliningrad and demolish it regardless of how many troops will be deployed there.