By John Q. Hosedrinker 
During a recent speech, Russian President Vladimir Putin responded to former US President Donald Trump’s characterization of Russia as a “paper tiger,” questioning the strength of NATO in comparison. Putin asserted that Russian forces are advancing in Ukraine and warned that supplying Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine would escalate the conflict, potentially involving direct US military personnel. He also dismissed concerns about Russian aggression towards NATO members, while highlighting alleged manpower issues and desertions within Ukraine’s military. Putin suggested a negotiated end to the war, claiming Russia controls significant portions of several Ukrainian regions.
Read the original article here
Putin calls NATO a paper tiger, a phrase that’s making the rounds, but it’s hard not to see the irony here. It’s the kind of playground taunt you’d expect, the “You’re a paper tiger!” “No, you are!” exchange. It’s easy to get wrapped up in the spectacle, the bravado of it all, but look beneath the surface and things get a lot more complex.
This “paper tiger” label is coming from the leader of a country currently entangled in a drawn-out conflict, a war that was supposed to be a swift victory. Instead, it’s been a prolonged struggle against a smaller nation. And, as the world watches, Russia has taken huge losses. The audacity of making such a bold statement while his country is apparently struggling is hard to ignore, and the timing feels almost comical, like a child trying to deflect blame.
The accusation has the distinct scent of desperation, a “I know you are but what am I?” kind of energy. This proclamation doesn’t just seem counterintuitive; it could also potentially undermine the justifications the Kremlin has offered for its invasion of Ukraine. It seems rather odd for someone, who views NATO as an existential threat, to then claim it’s a weak, easily dismissed entity.
Considering Russia’s current military situation, it’s difficult to take this assertion seriously. The truth is, the Russian military is allegedly scraping the bottom of the barrel to find soldiers, having to import mercenaries from countries like North Korea and recruit from nations like India and Kenya. If the Russian military is the “big bear” in this scenario, as suggested by some, then perhaps it should worry less about a “paper tiger” and more about the fact that it’s seemingly struggling to make progress. It seems like Putin is worried about the world’s perception of his actions, and his country’s capabilities.
It’s a rather interesting phenomenon, where the enemy is portrayed as both powerful and weak simultaneously. It’s like saying “NATO is an existential threat” one moment and then claiming “they are just a paper tiger” the next. He’s seemingly claiming victory in the war of words, while admitting to being scared of the very entity he denigrates.
The whole thing reeks of insecurity. Why be so concerned about Ukraine joining a “paper tiger” that he has apparently decided to go to war over it? If NATO is truly as weak as he claims, why the fear? This is especially evident in a context where he seems to be scrambling to maintain control and facing the implications of his actions.
The fact that NATO has actually expanded in recent years, adding Sweden and Finland, without the loss of a single life, really does make this all seem a bit absurd. Maybe the “paper tiger” should consider sending Ukraine some of those Tomahawk missiles.
The situation brings up a curious point: what precisely is Putin trying to accomplish here? Is he trying to bolster the morale of his own citizens by painting NATO as weak? Is he hoping to sow discord within NATO itself? Whatever the goal, the whole performance feels a bit like posturing.
There is a very long history of attempts to undermine NATO and the US and a very long list of those who would gladly offer assistance. It makes sense that he’d be trying to erode any confidence in the alliance. But even if successful, how does that change the reality of the war in Ukraine?
Ultimately, the whole “paper tiger” comment feels like a deflection, a way to shift the narrative away from Russia’s ongoing struggles in Ukraine. It’s a smokescreen designed to distract from the real issues, which include the fact that the Russian military is taking heavy losses, facing economic sanctions, and seeing their influence wane.