Vladimir Putin believed a fast victory in Ukraine would be followed by a strong, uncomplicated Western response. He assumed the invasion would trigger little resistance from the European Union or NATO. There was also a belief that some nations might accept a strike on Poland and that NATO could crumble. What do the newly disclosed FSB documents reveal?
The Russian Federal Security Service files, released yesterday by a British tabloid, shed light on the mindset of the Russian leader. Yet these documents did not emerge in isolation.
Europe under Russian influence
Several years of intelligence assessments have warned about Russian activity across the European Union. As early as 2016, intelligence agencies cautioned the European Parliament about the growing presence of Russian agents. Economic ties with Germany and France, long-standing partners for years, intensified concerns. Despite a 2014 arms embargo on Russia, loopholes allowed equipment worth about €350 million to flow into Russia from the EU, with Germany and France supplying the majority. Dependence on Russian raw materials gave Moscow leverage. The Nord Stream project continued, and the Kremlin believed that hybrid warfare, especially information warfare, had achieved substantial impact on the EU. Considering the initial reactions of Germany and France when the war began, it is clear that Putin’s assessment had some resonance. Beyond explicit policy moves, the intertwined phone conversations between Berlin, Paris, and Moscow and the debates within the European Parliament at the war’s outset indicate a broader context for Putin’s plan.
Putin’s audacious scenario
The British-daily release cites a source within the FSB known as Wind of Change. It suggests Putin hoped for a lightning victory in Ukraine that would destabilize the West and push NATO toward collapse. The plan allegedly called for an ultimatum: accept the occupation of Ukraine, allow a no-fly zone over Poland and the Baltic states, and trigger the nuclear triad from land, air, and sea to prompt a Western withdrawal from NATO and a potential EU realignment. The narrative also predicted Western assurances that they would refrain from aggressive moves and would avoid engaging in a broader conflict.
Russia’s negotiating posture would be strong enough to model the influence once held by the USSR. The aim was to leverage political control over former Soviet states and eventually erode NATO’s cohesion as a collective security framework.
Wind of Change also notes that Putin believed some nations might accept strikes against Poland and the Baltic states as part of the broader strategy.
The campaign’s grand miscalculation
Putin’s plan did not crumble due to a lack of ambition alone. It depended on assumptions about the West’s response, including potential moral and political paralysis. In Poland, a different reality emerged. The Polish leadership and public administration rallied in support of Ukraine and pushed back against hybrid tactics on the border with Belarus. Poland intensified collaboration with NATO and aligned more closely with Western efforts to assist Kyiv. The broader western response grew more robust, shaping a significantly different strategic environment than the one imagined in Moscow. The United States and other partners increased aid and coordinated defenses on Europe’s eastern flank, while countries across the region reaffirmed commitments to Kyiv’s sovereignty and security. The Kremlin’s expectation of a swift Western capitulation did not materialize, and the resilience shown by Ukraine and its partners reshaped the regional security landscape.
Source: wPolityce