On talk of "regime change." 1. It can't be the explicit aim of US/NATO policy b/c it wd back Putin into a corner, giving him no way out but intensifying the fight. 2. It can absolutely be the hope of well-meaning people everywhere that Putin's rule doesn't survive this episode.
-
-
I can't speak for Wittes, but I think he was talking about a domestic coup of oligarchs and/or generals, since he's made clear he didn't mean an American/NATO military push to topple the Russia government, which would be an insane thing to propose.
-
That's the problem with using term regime change -- it can be both. So would serve to consolidate Putin's rule not divide him from those around him.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.