Biden To Speak On Sanctions: Live Russia-Ukraine Updates – The New York Times

The White House and world leaders condemned the move, calling it a clear violation of Ukraine’s borders.

But as the tough global response takes shape, Mr. Biden and his counterparts were struggling to balance the need to take swift and severe action while preserving the possibility of even greater sanctions on Russia if Mr. Putin escalates the conflict by attempting to seize the entire country — a war that could kill tens of thousands of people.

Germany announced Tuesday that it would halt certification of a natural gas pipeline linking it with Russia. The British government said that it would sanction members of the Russian Parliament who voted to recognize the independence of the separatist areas and would create legislation to ensure that no British individual or company could do business with the regions, Donetsk and Luhansk.

“This is the first tranche, the first barrage of what we are prepared to do,” Prime Minister Boris Johnson told Parliament on Tuesday.

In the United States, Jon Finer, Mr. Biden’s deputy national security adviser, said that Russia’s forces had begun to move into Ukraine, declaring on CNN that “an invasion is an invasion, and that is what is underway.” But he and Mr. Johnson shared the same sentiment, saying that “we’ve always envisioned waves of sanctions that would unfold over time in response to steps Russia actually takes.”

Two European officials said Tuesday that Russia had sent troops into the area, but Russia’s Foreign Ministry denied having done so.

Mr. Putin remained defiant in the face of the worldwide condemnations of his decision to recognize the independence of the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics created after Russia fomented a separatist war in eastern Ukraine in 2014.

In what sounded like an ultimatum, he demanded that Ukraine recognize Russia’s claim to Crimea and relinquish its advanced weapons.

A deputy defense minister, Nikolai Pankov, said that Ukraine had gathered 60,000 troops to attack the Russia-backed separatist enclaves in the country’s east — a step that Ukraine denies having any plans to take.

“Negotiations have reached a dead end,” Mr. Pankov said in a televised speech. “The Ukrainian leadership has taken the path of violence and bloodshed.”

There was no immediate sign of major military escalation in eastern Ukraine, but fearful Ukrainians boarded buses out of the separatist areas as Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, urged his beleaguered nation to “keep a cool head” in the crisis.

Mr. Zelensky insisted that Ukraine would not yield territory, and his defense minister, Oleksiy Reznikov, appeared to be girding his country’s troops for battle.

“Ahead will be a difficult trial,” Mr. Reznikov said in a somber message released by the military. “There will be losses. You will have to go through pain and overcome fear and despondency.”

A day earlier, Mr. Putin delivered a long, fiery speech that described Ukraine as part of Russia, calling the government in Kyiv little more than a “puppet” of the United States and its leaders solely responsible for whatever “bloodshed” may come next.

“As for those who captured and are holding on to power in Kyiv,” he said, referring to the Ukrainian capital, “we demand that they immediately cease military action.”

“Should the Russian incursion into eastern Ukraine turn into a full-fledged invasion, it is likely that the global and U.S. economies will absorb yet another supply shock,” Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at the audit and tax firm RSM US.

Mr. Brusuelas projected that an “energy shock” could shave 1 percent off the United States’ gross domestic product in the next year and push the inflation rate up to 10 percent. That could raise the need for policy support to help lower income workers weather rising food, fuel and goods prices.

Oil prices approached $100 a barrel on Tuesday, the highest in more than seven years, and European gas futures spiked 13 percent after Russia ordered troops into separatist territories in Ukraine. Analysts said that an escalating conflict could also lead to widening credit spreads and weigh on global stock prices.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany said Tuesday that his country would halt certification of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline that would link it with Russia.

Fallout from additional sanctions would most likely land more directly on European countries because of their heavy reliance on Russian natural gas.

“For the euro area economy, the main threat from tensions between Ukraine and Russia is a stagflationary shock in which financial conditions tighten and energy prices soar,” Claus Vistesen and Melanie Debono, economists at Pantheon Macroeconomics, wrote in a note to clients.

But the economic impact of the sanctions could be more muted than the saber rattling would suggest.

Economists at Capital Economics noted that Russia’s external debt and ties to other advanced economies have waned since the 2014 Crimea crisis, insulating its economy from efforts to cut it off from the global financial system. They predicted that the most likely sanctions measures could shave around 1 percent from Russia’s gross domestic product.

The Ukrainian economy will most likely face the most acute pain because of its fragile balance sheet and need for foreign assistance.

“At the risk of stating the obvious, the biggest economic impact will be on Ukraine,” Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics, said. “Depending on the evolution of the conflict, this could be challenging to coordinate.”

Mr. Putin added that he had not decided to send troops into Ukraine “right at this moment.” But asked whether one could resolve issues by force and “remain on the side of the good,” Mr. Putin made it clear he saw military action as a morally defensible course.

“Why do you think that the good must always be powerless?” Mr. Putin said. “I don’t believe so. I think that the good implies the ability to protect oneself. We will proceed based on this.”

Mr. Putin further laid the foundation for military conflict by declaring that Russia would recognize the sovereignty of the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics over the full territory that they claim. That includes a large area of eastern Ukraine that is currently controlled by the Ukrainian government, and includes several cities like Mariupol and Kramatorsk.

“We expect — and I want to emphasize this — that all contentious issues will be resolved in negotiations between today’s Kyiv authorities and the leadership of these republics,” Mr. Putin said. “Unfortunately, at this point in time, we understand that this is impossible because the hostilities there are still ongoing and, moreover, are tending to escalate.”

Mr. Putin signed decrees on Monday recognizing the separatist republics. But until Mr. Putin’s remarks Tuesday evening, it was not clear over what territory he would recognize their sovereignty.

Kyiv has refused to recognize or negotiate directly with the separatist authorities, characterizing them as Kremlin puppets.

In his news conference, Mr. Putin laid out a series of additional demands to Kyiv that, he said, the government must fulfill to resolve the situation “in a long-term, historical perspective.” He said Ukraine must recognize the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014, as Russian territory; declare that it will never join the NATO alliance and maintain “neutrality”; and give up all the weaponry that the United States and other Western countries have delivered to it in recent years.

“The most important point is a known degree of demilitarization of Ukraine today,” Mr. Putin said. “This is the only objectively controllable factor that can be observed and reacted to.”

Just before state television aired Mr. Putin’s news conference, it showed Russia’s upper house of Parliament approving a request from Mr. Putin to use military force abroad that had been made public only minutes earlier. A deputy defense minister, Nikolai Pankov, told the assembly that Ukraine had gathered 60,000 troops to attack the Russia-backed separatist enclaves in the country’s east — a step that Ukraine denies having any plans to take.

“Negotiations have reached a dead end,” Mr. Pankov said in a televised speech. “The Ukrainian leadership has taken the path of violence and bloodshed.”

Just after showing the vote, state television cut to the Kremlin, where Mr. Putin was shown holding an unscheduled news conference. He repeated his past, unfounded claims that Ukraine was carrying out a “genocide” of Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine. Asked about the potential use of force, Mr. Putin responded, “I didn’t say that the troops will go there right at this moment.”

Two European officials have said that Russia has already sent troops into the area, but Russia has denied having done so.

Mr. Putin signed a decree on Monday ordering Russia’s military to perform “peacekeeping functions” in the separatist territories, the same day that he recognized them as independent nations. But as of Monday evening in Moscow, the Russian Defense Ministry had not said it was deploying troops to the territories.

Valentina Matviyenko, the chairwoman of the upper house house of Parliament, said the use of military force was being approved to “stop this bloody civil war,” according to the Interfax news agency.

Second, Mr. Biden gave the green light for an unprecedented public information campaign against Mr. Putin. With the support of his top intelligence officials — and with a promise to protect the intelligence agencies’ “sources and methods” — the president allowed a wave of public releases aimed at preventing Mr. Putin from employing his usual denials to divide his adversaries.

Third, when it became clear this year that Mr. Putin was continuing to build up forces at Ukraine’s border, the president approved sending Ukraine more weapons, including Javelin anti-tank missiles, and deploying more troops to other countries in Eastern Europe as a show of solidarity with Ukraine and to reassure nervous allies on NATO’s eastern flank.

The demands by some rank-and-file lawmakers for action are growing more strident.

“The time for taking action to impose significant costs on President Putin and the Kremlin starts now,” declared Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware and a key ally of the president’s.

Senator Jim Risch of Idaho, the senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said security assistance to Ukraine must ramp up now and demanded “strong and immediate sanctions.”

“If this administration wishes to have a strong and decisive reaction that will deter even more aggressive behavior, they should follow our lead — the world is watching, and decisive action is needed,” Mr. Risch said in a statement.

Just what “lead” Mr. Risch was referring to was unclear. A month of back-room efforts to unite around tough sanctions legislation came to nothing before the Senate left Washington last week for a Presidents’ Day recess.

The Senate’s caution was typified by the statement released by the Foreign Relations Committee chairman, Robert Menendez of New Jersey, who said on Monday evening: “To be clear, if any additional Russian troops or proxy forces cross into Donbas, the Biden administration and our European allies must not hesitate in imposing crushing sanctions. There must be tangible, far-reaching and substantial costs for Russia in response to this unjustified act.”

The Democrat did not explain what he meant by “additional Russian troops.” Troops were flowing in at the time of his statement.

Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, alluded on Tuesday to the collapse of Congress’s efforts to reach consensus on sanctions, suggesting that lawmakers had missed an opportunity to change Mr. Putin’s behavior.

And other Republicans said Mr. Biden was to blame.

“Joe Biden has refused to take meaningful action, and his weakness has emboldened Moscow,” Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, said in a statement on Tuesday, echoing Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, who wrote on Monday, “Biden-Harris officials are to an enormous extent directly responsible for this crisis.”

More striking is the relative silence from congressional leaders. Both House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, and the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said in recent days that Mr. Biden had the authority he needed to act, and expressed support for his diplomacy.

After meeting on Monday with Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, Ms. Pelosi issued a statement calling Mr. Putin’s move “a thinly veiled attempt to mask what is a clear attack on Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

“We commend President Biden for his strong leadership and Prime Minister Johnson for his partnership,” she said.

The choice of the word “invasion” was significant. That was the trigger for sanctions, and Mr. Biden angered the Ukrainian leadership when he suggested in a news conference that there might be lesser penalties for a “minor incursion.” Now that Mr. Putin has ordered forces into Eastern Ukraine, the administration, in its choice of words, is making clear that there is nothing minor about the operation.

But that still leaves open the question of how to calibrate the sanctions — because so far there have been no mass casualties. Mr. Finer quickly indicated that the administration could hold back some of its promised punishments in the hopes of deterring further, far more violent aggression by Mr. Putin aimed at taking the rest of the country.

“We’ve always envisioned waves of sanctions that would unfold over time in response to steps Russia actually takes not just statements that they make,” Mr. Finer said. “We’ve always said we’re going to watch the situation on the ground and have a swift and severe response.”

Overnight, Mr. Biden and his aides were consulting with allies, so that their response would be coordinated. But Prime Minister Boris Johnson pointed toward the direction they were leaning when he told Parliament on Tuesday that “this is the first tranche, the first barrage of what we are prepared to do and we hold further sanctions at readiness to be deployed along side the United States and European Union if the situation escalates still further.”

It is one of those situations where Mr. Biden has no truly good choices. If his response seems too mild, he will send the message to Mr. Putin that the world is not going to make him pay a big price for sending troops into the Russian-speaking eastern part of the country — replicating what happened when the Russian leader annexed Crimea in 2014. If he implements all of the sanctions, Mr. Putin may conclude that there is nothing left to keep him from attacking the rest of the country.

Mr. Biden discussed this dilemma at a news conference in January. He said that if an attack was “something significantly short of a significant invasion” he would impose sanctions, but only to the point that European allies go along. And several of those allies have more at stake, including their gas supplies. “I got to make sure everybody is on the same page as we move along,’’ Mr. Biden said.

That was the news conference where he used the phrase “minor incursions,” and then had to backtrack, promising sanctions if one Russian soldier goes into Ukraine. But his words were revealing about how he thinks about the problem. If “there’s Russian forces crossing the border, killing Ukrainian fighter, et cetera — I think that changes everything.”

Mr. Biden also said during that news conference that “the most important thing to do: Big nations can’t bluff,” a phrase that now leaves him open to criticism after saying for weeks that even one soldier crossing the border into Ukraine would trigger an entire barrage of sanctions against Russia.

The significance of that decision was potentially momentous.

If Russia chooses to recognize only the territory of Ukraine’s Luhansk and Donetsk regions that is currently controlled by the separatists, it could deploy Russian forces into that territory without using force.

But if it decrees that, as the separatists claim, the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics comprise the entirety of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions, then the Kremlin could cite that as justification to launch an assault against Ukrainian troops stationed at the front line.

On Tuesday, Andrei Rudenko, a deputy foreign minister, said Russia would recognize the separatist republics on the territory where their leadership “exercises its authority and jurisdiction,” Russian news agencies reported.

But later in the day, the Kremlin’s spokesman, Dmitri S. Peskov, provided a different characterization of the territory of the newly recognized statelets: “The boundaries that they proclaimed for themselves when these two republics were proclaimed.”

That seemed to signal that Mr. Putin was defining the “people’s republics” as having rightful sovereignty over all of Ukraine’s Luhansk and Donetsk regions, which include major cities like Mariupol and Kramatorsk that are currently under Ukrainian control. Asked to clarify whether the people’s republics included Mariupol, Mr. Peskov said, according to the Interfax news agency: “I have nothing to add. Those boundaries in which they exist and were declared.”

The ambiguity showed that Mr. Putin — as he has throughout his military buildup surrounding Ukraine — was trying to keep open multiple options for how to act in the coming hours and days.

Dmitri Khoroshilov, the vice speaker of the Luhansk People’s Republic Parliament, previewed what could be a worst-case scenario: a Russian offensive against Ukraine to win control of the entire territory of the two regions.

“We must call on Ukraine to voluntarily withdraw its troops” from all of the Luhansk region, Mr. Khoroshilov said on Tuesday, according to Interfax. “If this does not happen, I believe that a decision will be made that will allow peace to be established and to restore our territorial integrity on the full territory of the Luhansk People’s Republic.”

“I wouldn’t say it is a fully fledged invasion,” Mr. Borrell said, “but Russian troops are on Ukrainian soil.”

Overnight, footage of army convoys moving through the separatist territories circulated on social media, but it has been difficult to determine whether they were Russian forces. Russia has had military personnel in the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, known as the Donbas, since 2014. The Polish minister, Mariusz Blaszczak, did not specify whether he was referring to new Russian units sent into the area.

Russia’s military presence in the two breakaway areas of Ukraine has waxed and waned since the spring of 2014, when Moscow sent in troops and military hardware to support pro-Russian gunmen who seized government buildings and declared the establishment of “people’s republics.”

In a statement on the defense ministry’s Twitter account, the Polish minister said: “We confirm that Russian forces have entered the territory of the self-proclaimed republics. Therefore, they violated the Ukrainian borders and international law has been violated. Such actions are unacceptable.”

Poland and three Baltic States to the north — all of which share borders with Russia or Belarus, and are members of both the E.U. and NATO — have been pushing the European bloc to immediately impose sanctions on Russia. But they have met resistance from governments that believe Russia’s recent actions do not yet constitute an invasion.

Japan

Prime Minister Fumio Kishida called Mr. Putin’s actions “unacceptable” and declared that Japan would be ready to order sanctions against Russia along with its Western allies should Russian forces further invade Ukraine.

Although Mr. Kishida did not specify the measures under consideration, Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper reported on Tuesday that it would include an export ban on semiconductors and other technology exports such as artificial intelligence and robots, as well as restrictions on Russian banks.

South Korea

President Moon Jae-in said: “The sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine must be respected. We must actively seek a peaceful solution through dialogue.”

He added: “Countries around the world should work together to ensure that the Ukraine issue can be resolved quickly and peacefully, and South Korea will actively participate in those efforts as a responsible member of the international community.”

Australia

“We cannot have threats of violence being used to seek to advantage nation’s positions over others,” Prime Minister Scott Morrison said. “That is not a peaceful world order that would be achieving that.”

Mr. Morrison pledged that if other governments imposed heavy sanctions against Russia, “We will be in lock step with them and we’ll be moving just as quickly.”

Italy

Prime Minister Mario Draghi expressed the “strongest condemnation” of Mr. Putin’s decision, calling it “an unacceptable violation of the democratic sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.”

He added: “The path of dialogue remains essential, but we are already defining within the European Union measures and sanctions against Russia.”

Two other families, lugging suitcases, some with toddlers on hips, boarded the early-morning westbound train, saying they were escaping possible violence. Ms. Gudyatskaya said she would live with a brother in Kyiv “until the situation clears up.”

Mr. Putin’s speech left Ukrainians, and Western governments, guessing as to what might come next. In an address that was partly a history lesson, Mr. Putin asserted that Ukraine had been “created by Russia” and should be part of it today, suggesting a claim to the entire country.

Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, delivered a televised speech at 2 a.m. to urge calm, saying that the country would “keep a cool head” in the crisis. But he also said that it would not yield territory.

Ms. Gudyatskaya, who stood on the train platform in the chilly morning air a few hours later, with just one suitcase and unsure when she might return home, said she blamed Mr. Putin for her predicament.

“If they had another leader, they wouldn’t do this,” she said of the Russians. “The Russian people are fine.”

Already, the escalating fighting along the front line between Ukrainian government forces and the two enclaves, which began on Thursday, has grown close to her home in the town of Novoaidar. “We can hear it now through our closed windows,” she said of artillery shelling.

Svetlana, her daughter, who toted a backpack with rainbow-hued straps and said she wanted to become either a car mechanic or a nurse, said she wasn’t as worried as her mother.

“Everything is fine,” she said as she boarded the train. “Our guys will win. We will defeat Russia and Russia will fall apart.”

Ms. Gudyatskaya shook her head. “Faith is always good, Sveta,” she said. “But I am worried.”

European natural gas futures are especially sensitive to the latest news, because Russia provides more than a third of Europe’s supply, with some of it running through pipelines in Ukraine. Dutch front-month gas futures jumped 13.8 percent when trading started on Tuesday, then eased a bit to about 80 euros a megawatt-hour, up almost 10 percent.

After oil prices spent a week more or less flat, uncertainty has gripped the markets in recent days. Prices went higher on Sunday as more troops massed at Ukraine’s border, then fell again as diplomatic solutions seemed more plausible.

An invasion could interrupt Russian natural gas and oil shipments to parts of Europe and then be followed by a decline in purchases of Russian energy by the West. Russia produces about 10 percent of world oil supplies and, in recent years, about one-third of Europe’s gas. In recent months Russian gas flows to Europe have dropped sharply, with much of the shortfall made up by liquefied natural gas shipments from the United States and elsewhere.

A key issue is how far the West would go in imposing sanctions that might crimp Russia’s oil and gas business, which is critical to the nation’s economy and a major source of revenue for the Kremlin’s budget.

Analysts say that Western nations may try to avoid hitting oil and gas exports because of the potential impact on world energy markets, especially in Europe, which is already struggling with high prices for gas and electricity.

But some of the financial sanctions being considered, including restrictions on dealing with major Russian banks, could disrupt Western payments for the oil and gas, which account for about half of the country’s exports.

In addition, sanctions could create difficulties for Western oil companies with interests in Russia. The list of such assets is extensive. Shell, Europe’s largest oil company, has a stake in a liquefied natural gas project on Sakhalin Island off eastern Russia. Exxon Mobil is a partner in an oil facility in the same area. TotalEnergies, the French giant, participates in a liquefied natural gas operation in the Russian Arctic. BP has a nearly 20 percent share in Rosneft, Russia’s national oil company.

“Some of the financial sanctions under consideration in Washington could make it challenging for” such companies to continue operating in Russia, wrote Helima Croft, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets, an investment bank, in a note to clients.

In the event of a disruption in energy supplies, the United States and many other industrialized countries would most likely consider releasing millions of barrels of oil from their strategic reserves in an effort to offset any shortfalls. Washington would also lean on those oil-producing countries, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, that are believed to have capacity to increase production.

There is also talk in Washington of suspending federal taxes on gasoline, which could help restrain prices at the pump, at least for a short time.

Consumers in the United States are already feeling pain from higher prices, along with their counterparts in Europe. The average national price of a gallon of gasoline rose nearly 4 cents over the last week to $3.53, roughly 90 cents higher than a year ago. Gasoline prices at the pump usually follow global oil price trends by a week or two.

Without mentioning Russia, Mr. Wang called on all sides to uphold the principles of the United Nations Charter, which protects member states’ sovereignty and territorial integrity.

At the same time, echoing earlier Chinese statements, Mr. Wang seemed to recognize Mr. Putin’s grievances. “Every country’s legitimate security concerns should be respected,” he said.

The equivocal statements underscored the delicate balance that China has sought since the crisis began, showing sympathy, if not explicit support, for Russia without risking a deepening breach with the United States.

While Mr. Putin and the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, have forged a friendship with “no limits,” as they put it on the eve of the Winter Olympics in Beijing this month, China’s government has been wary of endorsing any territorial grab in Ukraine, which could also have economic and diplomatic side effects in China.

China’s worry about the crisis was clear in what appeared to be a censorship warning inadvertently posted on Weibo, the social media platform, by a state newspaper, Beijing News. It warned employees to create neither a negative image of Russia nor a positive one of the West, and to censor reader comments.

The directive was promptly removed, but the crisis in Ukraine remained at the top of the list of trending topics on Weibo, showing public interest.

China also signaled that the conflict in Ukraine was far from over after Mr. Putin’s moves on Monday — which came a day after the closing of the Olympics.

Its embassy in Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv, warned Chinese citizens to begin to take precautions and remain in touch with local student unions, chambers of commerce or other Chinese organizations there.

“Increase safety awareness,” the embassy said in a statement, “and stock up on daily necessities like food and water.”

Early Tuesday morning, Jon Finer, Mr. Biden’s deputy national security adviser, said that Russia’s forces had begun to move into Ukraine, declaring on CNN that “an invasion is an invasion, and that is what is underway.”

Fearful Ukrainians boarded buses out of the separatist areas even as Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, urged his beleaguered nation to “keep a cool head” in the crisis.

But at the same time, Mr. Zelensky insisted that Ukraine would not yield territory, and his defense minister, Oleksiy Reznikov, appeared to be girding his country’s troops for battle.

“Ahead will be a difficult trial,” Mr. Reznikov said in a somber message released by the military. “There will be losses. You will have to go through pain and overcome fear and despondency.”

Still, there was no immediate sign of major military escalation in eastern Ukraine, and much of the focus on Tuesday was in European capitals, where leaders were preparing what they said would be a harsh sanctions package against Moscow. United States and European leaders have condemned Mr. Putin’s decision on Monday to recognize the separatist regions, the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics created after Russia fomented a separatist war in eastern Ukraine in 2014.

The Biden administration on Tuesday morning was debating what sanctions to unleash against Mr. Putin, his associates and Russia’s financial system. The United States faces a difficult task, at once trying to make it clear that Mr. Putin’s actions in eastern Ukraine won’t go unpunished while leaving open the option of imposing further sanctions should Mr. Putin attack the rest of the country.

The British government said that it would sanction members of the Russian Parliament who voted to recognize the independence of the separatist areas and would create legislation to ensure that no British individual or company can do business with Donetsk and Luhansk.

In Moscow, Mr. Putin dismissed what he described as speculation that Moscow planned to “recreate the Russian Empire in the empire’s boundaries.”

“This absolutely does not correspond to reality,” Mr. Putin said in televised remarks alongside President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan, a former Soviet republic that has close ties to Ukraine and Russia.

A day earlier, Mr. Putin delivered a long, fiery speech that described Ukraine as part of Russia, calling the government in Kyiv little more than a “puppet” of the United States and its leaders solely responsible for whatever “bloodshed” may come next.

“As for those who captured and are holding on to power in Kyiv,” he said, referring to the Ukrainian capital, “we demand that they immediately cease military action.”

In recent weeks, some 150,000 to 190,000 Russian troops, by Western estimates, have gradually drawn a noose around their neighbor, and the United States has warned repeatedly that the question about a Russian invasion was not if but when.

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken said on Twitter that “Russia’s move to recognize the ‘independence’ of so-called republics controlled by its own proxies is a predictable, shameful act.” He added that he had told Ukraine’s foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, that the United States condemned the actions in the “strongest possible terms.”

At an emergency United Nations Security Council meeting late Monday, several nations rebuked Russia, saying that the move amounted to a violation of the United Nations Charter and an attack on Ukraine’s sovereignty. Although the meeting ended with no action taken, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the American ambassador to the United Nations, said that council members had “sent a unified message — that Russia should not start war.”