invasion

WASHINGTON — Russia stood alone Friday to veto a U.N. resolution condemning its “brutal” invasion of Ukraine, killing the measure — for now. But all other members in the solemn session of the U.N. Security Council either voted in favor or abstained, testament to rounds of intensive diplomatic pleas by the Biden administration.

The U.S.-drafted measure, which demands the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of the Russian troops battering Ukraine, was approved by 11 members. Most notably, China, thought to be in Moscow’s corner, abstained. So did two U.S. allies, India and the United Arab Emirates, in a disappointment for the U.S. Russia, as one of five permanent members, holds veto power, which it exercised.

That Russia’s “isolation” was so starkly drawn was hailed as a major victory by U.S. diplomats. And they vowed they will carry a similar resolution to the full 193-member General Assembly, where there are no vetoes and only a simple majority is needed to pass.

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, said that she was not surprised by the Russian veto but that it would not deter efforts to rebuke and stop Moscow’s aggression.

“Russia, you can veto this resolution, but you cannot veto our voices,” she said, looking directly at the Russian representative, Vasily Nebenzya, who, in one of the peculiarities of U.N. politics, was chairing the session as rotating president of the council.

“You cannot veto the truth,” Thomas-Greenfield continued. “You cannot veto our principles. You cannot veto the Ukrainian people. You cannot veto the U.N. Charter. And you will not veto accountability.”

Nebenzya, after the vote but with the council still in session, took Thomas-Greenfield and several other Western representatives to task for what they had condemned as egregious abuses and attacks on civilians by Russian forces.

“Who are you to moralize?” he said. Thomas-Greenfield looked back at him, stone-faced.

He and the Ukrainian ambassador, Sergiy Kyslytsya, also had testy exchanges. Nebenzya called his Ukrainian counterpart “boorish,” while Kyslytsya said Nebenzya and his comments accusing Ukraine of repression earned him a special “seat in hell.”

Friday’s vote followed senior U.S. diplomats’ intense lobbying of their counterparts from dozens of countries to back the resolution at the Security Council or at a possible later meeting of the full United Nations, where a similar condemnation could be brought.

Russia “will be shown to be isolated on the world stage,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said a couple of hours ahead of the vote.

Although the Americans were disappointed that India and the UAE did not join in the “yes” column, it was China’s decision to abstain that gave them particular relief.

Before Friday’s meeting, U.S. diplomats expressed the likelihood that Beijing would side with Moscow. They saw glimmers of hope, however: President Xi Jinping has been publicly measured in support for the invasion. Although he values a growing relationship with Moscow, he may also be reluctant to pick too bitter a fight with the U.S. and NATO.

The Chinese representative to the Security Council, Zhang Jun, explained his country’s vote saying that although China did not support violating the sovereignty of another nation, as Russia has done, the resolution might add “fuel to the fire” rather than contributing to a diplomatic path to peace. He also said Russia’s “legitimate security aspirations” had to be addressed.

“Ukraine should become a bridge between East and West, not an outpost for confrontation among major powers,” Zhang said.

Similarly, the UAE and India said that although they abhorred Russia’s actions, they feared the resolution would shut the door to diplomacy and dialogue. Both countries, especially India, also have strong ties to Russia.

The Security Council vote came after increased economic sanctions the Biden administration imposed on Russia on Thursday — and on Putin himself on Friday — which had been augmented by a series of measures by the European Union.

Rallying broader support for a condemnation of Russia, however, had been a surprisingly difficult task for U.S. diplomats.

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and his deputy, Wendy R. Sherman, as well as other officials, had been on the phone to counterparts from a host of nations, including Portugal, Turkey, Moldova, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Those efforts followed months of in-person and virtual consultations and warnings among allies about Russia’s designs on Ukraine.

India had been an especially prickly case. In addition to historical ties with Moscow, New Delhi in recent years has built a defense and diplomatic partnership with Washington.

But India was tepid in its initial response to Russia’s aggression. During a Security Council session that unfolded in New York on Wednesday night as President Vladimir Putin unleashed Russian troops on Ukraine, India’s representative called for de-escalation but did not condemn Moscow. So, while not a “yes,” India’s abstention Friday could have been worse, diplomats said.

A Biden administration official who briefed reporters on the U.S. strategy for the Security Council rejected any suggestion that the difficulty in putting together a united front reflected the impotence of consensus-based global organizations like the United Nations and especially the Security Council, where Russia and China are permanent members, along with the United States, France and Britain. Russia currently holds the rotating president’s seat on the council.

“It’s important that we send a message to Ukraine, to Russia and to the world that the Security Council will not look away,” said the official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity to discuss behind-the-scenes deliberations. “The council was established to respond to precisely this scenario: a stronger country waging war against a weaker neighbor in violation of the U.N. Charter and the principles of the U.N. Charter.”

But U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, who spoke to reporters after the Security Council meeting, was clearly disappointed.

The United Nations “was born out of war, to end war,” he said. “Today that objective was not achieved.”

WASHINGTON — Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines told lawmakers Tuesday morning that Russian President Vladimir Putin did not expect the level of Ukrainian resistance to his invasion, nor the level and speed of sanctions imposed by countries around the world.

“Our analysts assess that Putin is unlikely to be deterred by such setbacks and instead may escalate, essentially doubling down,” she said.

The comments from Haines and other intelligence officials came in an unusually candid public hearing with members of the House Intelligence Committee. The hearing was expected to focus on the intelligence community’s annual global threat assessment, but it was instead largely dominated by questions about Russia’s two-week-old invasion of its neighbor Ukraine. The House panel will get a classified assessment in the afternoon.

Haines said Putin likely expected the conflict to last a matter of days at most and predicted Russia will be hard pressed to hold any ground it gains.

“We assess Putin feels aggrieved the West does not give him proper deference and perceives this as a war he cannot afford to lose, but what he might be willing to accept as a victory may change over time given the significant costs he is incurring,” she said.

CIA Director William Burns agreed, saying Putin initially believed Ukraine was weakened and easily intimidated, and that the Russian leader had modernized his military to the point of ensuring a quick victory. Burns added that Putin had been confident early on that he had sanction-proofed his economy, and that the Europeans were too distracted to pay much attention to the invasion.

“He’s been proven wrong on every count,” Burns said.

Still, Burns said the invasion is a “matter of deep personal conviction” for Putin.

“He has been stewing in a combustible combination of grievance and ambition for many years,” Burns said.

Putin’s plan was premised on seizing Kyiv within the first two days of the campaign, Burns said, and he is getting increasingly frustrated at the lack of progress.

“He’s likely to double down and try to grind down the Ukrainian military with no regard for civilian casualties,” Burns said. “He has no sustainable political endgame in the face of what is going to continue to be fierce resistance from Ukrainians.”

At this point, Burns said he cannot see how Putin can stand up a puppet regime in the face of massive opposition from the Ukrainian people, warning there is an “ugly next few weeks” ahead.

Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Scott Berrier estimated that 2,000 to 4,000 Russian soldiers have died in the less than two weeks since the invasion began, a number that far exceeds what the Russian government has acknowledged. For context, the United States suffered more than 7,000 military deaths over two decades in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Berrier said Russia appears to be attempting to cut off food and water to Kyiv as a strategy.

“It will become somewhat desperate in I would say 10 days to two weeks,” he said.

Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) told reporters after the hearing that as Putin doubles down on Ukraine, it remains difficult to see how the conflict ends.

“What’s the offramp? I think what we can do is just to continue to escalate the price that he and Russia have to pay for this,” Schiff said. “I think until he feels that his own regime is at risk, it’s hard to see him looking for an exit ramp.”

Congressional lawmakers are debating how much additional aid to send to Ukraine, and what additional economic measures to take against Russia, which is already seeing unprecedented sanctions on its financial systems, top leaders and businesses. On Tuesday, President Biden announced a ban on the import of Russian oil and energy products into the United States.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) has called for some $12 billion in aid, and urged passage this week, saying it “will provide both humanitarian and military assistance for Ukraine: funding for refugees, medical supplies, emergency food supplies, as well as funding to support weapons transfers into Ukraine, and help for our eastern flank NATO allies.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) has said Congress is looking to pass $10 billion in emergency aid for Ukraine as part of a larger government funding measure. A vote could occur as soon as today.