When Putin invaded Ukraine in the Spring of 2022, the western world reacted in understandable horror.  The first major ground mobilization in Europe since The Second World War arrived in shocking, gruesome fashion.  Almost immediately, global security experts were predicting Kyiv would fall within days, and the overmatched, under trained Ukrainian Army could not possibly compete with the Russian juggernaut.  But these early predictions severely underestimated the Ukrainian will to protect their homeland, and overestimated Russia’s military acuity. Now, almost a year into the conflagration, Russia is on its heels, and by all accounts Putin’s gamble has been one calamity after another for his sclerotic regime.   But the question that still remains is, how does it end? For some foreign policy experts, military brass, and Russia watchers, the only way to prevent similar incursions in the future Putin must be beaten outright, and beaten badly.  But others argue that the risks of cornering a madman vastly outweigh the benefits, and offering Putin an off ramp is the best possible scenario to restore order, peace, and stability.



Arguing for the motion is James Goldgeier, visiting fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution and a professor of international relations at the School of International Service at American University, where he served as dean from 2011 to 2017.



Arguing against the motion is Emma Ashford, Resident senior fellow with the New American Engagement Initiative in the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security,and her opinion writing has been featured in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, Foreign Policy, and Vox.

Speaker Quotes 

JAMES GOLDGEIER: “Putin has had plenty of possible off ramps before and during this war. And he's shown no interest in taking them”.



EMMA ASHFORD: “Putin may deserve a dead end, but it's not clear to me that that's better for everybody else”.






The host of the Munk Debates is Rudyard Griffiths - @rudyardg.  

Tweet your comments about this episode to @munkdebate or comment on our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/munkdebates/

To sign up for a weekly email reminder for this podcast, send an email to podcast@munkdebates.com.  

To support civil and substantive debate on the big questions of the day, consider becoming a Munk Member at https://munkdebates.com/membership

Members receive access to our 10+ year library of great debates in HD video, a free Munk Debates book, newsletter and ticketing privileges at our live events.

This podcast is a project of the Munk Debates, a Canadian charitable organization dedicated to fostering civil and substantive public dialogue - https://munkdebates.com/

Senior Producer: Jacob Lewis

Editor: Adam Karch

When Putin invaded Ukraine in the Spring of 2022, the western world reacted in understandable horror.  The first major ground mobilization in Europe since The Second World War arrived in shocking, gruesome fashion.  Almost immediately, global security experts were predicting Kyiv would fall within days, and the overmatched, under trained Ukrainian Army could not possibly compete with the Russian juggernaut.  But these early predictions severely underestimated the Ukrainian will to protect their homeland, and overestimated Russia’s military acuity. Now, almost a year into the conflagration, Russia is on its heels, and by all accounts Putin’s gamble has been one calamity after another for his sclerotic regime.   But the question that still remains is, how does it end? For some foreign policy experts, military brass, and Russia watchers, the only way to prevent similar incursions in the future Putin must be beaten outright, and beaten badly.  But others argue that the risks of cornering a madman vastly outweigh the benefits, and offering Putin an off ramp is the best possible scenario to restore order, peace, and stability.
 
Arguing for the motion is James Goldgeier, visiting fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution and a professor of international relations at the School of International Service at American University, where he served as dean from 2011 to 2017.
 
Arguing against the motion is Emma Ashford, Resident senior fellow with the New American Engagement Initiative in the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security,and her opinion writing has been featured in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, Foreign Policy, and Vox.
Speaker Quotes 
JAMES GOLDGEIER: “Putin has had plenty of possible off ramps before and during this war. And he's shown no interest in taking them”.
 
EMMA ASHFORD: “Putin may deserve a dead end, but it's not clear to me that that's better for everybody else”.
 
The host of the Munk Debates is Rudyard Griffiths - <a href="https://twitter.com/rudyardg">@rudyardg</a>.  
Tweet your comments about this episode to @munkdebate or comment on our Facebook page <a href="https://www.facebook.com/munkdebates/">https://www.facebook.com/munkdebates/</a>
To sign up for a weekly email reminder for this podcast, send an email to podcast@munkdebates.com.  
To support civil and substantive debate on the big questions of the day, consider becoming a Munk Member at <a href="https://munkdebates.com/membership">https://munkdebates.com/membership</a>
Members receive access to our 10+ year library of great debates in HD video, a free Munk Debates book, newsletter and ticketing privileges at our live events.
This podcast is a project of the Munk Debates, a Canadian charitable organization dedicated to fostering civil and substantive public dialogue - <a href="https://munkdebates.com/">https://munkdebates.com/</a>
Senior Producer: Jacob Lewis
Editor: Adam Karch

The Munk Debates podcast is an extension of the main stage events - in subject, speaker selection, tone and format. It will introduce the iconic brand - and its engaging debates about significant issues of our time. Audiences will hear strong and passionate arguments from both sides of an issue so they will have enough information to make up their own minds about where they stand.

The Munk Debates podcast is an extension of the main stage events - in subject, speaker selection, tone and format. It will introduce the iconic brand - and its engaging debates about significant issues of our time. Audiences will hear strong and passionate arguments from both sides of an issue so they will have enough information to make up their own minds about where they stand.

The Munk Debates Podcast

The Munk Debates Podcast is dedicated to convening civil and substantive debates and dialogues on the big issues of the day. Each debate features two compelling thinkers debating a topic driving the public conversation. Each dialogue features world-renowned thinkers offering unique insight into the issues affecting us most. The podcast is an extension of the charitable Munk Debates' commitment to pushing back against the political polarization and restoring the art of public debate in our time. For more information about the Munk Debates visit www.munkdebates.com/podcast

The Munk Debates Podcast is dedicated to convening civil and substantive debates and dialogues on the big issues of the day. Each debate features two compelling thinkers debating a topic driving the public conversation. Each dialogue features world-renowned thinkers offering unique insight into the issues affecting us most. The podcast is an extension of the charitable Munk Debates' commitment to pushing back against the political polarization and restoring the art of public debate in our time. For more information about the Munk Debates visit www.munkdebates.com/podcast

Advertisement