US says not seeking regime change in Russia; walks back Biden's hint on deposing Putin

WASHINGTON: The United States has walked back President Joe Biden's ad-libbed remark during his speech in Poland on Saturday that Russia's President Vladimir Putin "cannot remain in power," clarifying that he (Biden) is not advocating regime change in Moscow.
The stunning unscripted remarks -- "For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power" -- came at the tail end of a powerful speech that won wide acclaim in Europe and US, but caused a stir in diplomatic circles worldwide with speculation on whether he is raising stakes and seeking Putin's removal.
Russia responded curtly soon after the speech, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov telling state news agencies: “That’s not for Biden to decide. The president of Russia is elected by Russians.”

US officials acknowledged that the remarks were not in the President's prepared speech, and clarified that his point was that Putin cannot be allowed to exercise power over his neighbors or the region. "He was not discussing Putin’s power in Russia, or regime change,” the White House told the media.
"I think the president, the White House, made the point last night that, quite simply, President Putin cannot be empowered to wage war or engage in aggression against Ukraine or anyone else," Secretary of State Antony Blinken clarified in Israel during a press conference, adding, "As you know, and as you have heard us say repeatedly, we do not have a strategy of regime change in Russia -- or anywhere else, for that matter."
If the President misspoke, it added to his reputation for off-the-cuff remarks that appear to tumble out of his mouth too often as he trips over words, a fallibility sometime attribute to his speaking too fast to overcome a stuttering problem.
Earlier on Friday, the White House also had to clarify that the President was not signaling American boots on the ground in Ukraine when he told US paratroopers during a meeting in Poland about the situation in Ukraine, "You're going to see when you're there – some of you have been there – you're going to see women, young people, standing in the middle, in front of a damn tank, saying, 'I'm not leaving'."
Some US analysts said the latest Biden stumble, possibly caused by the momentum of his own rhetoric, could aggravate Putin and embolden him out of desperation to be even more confrontational, complicating any effort to restore peace.
"@potus just expanded US war aims, calling for regime change. However desirable it may be, it is not within our power to accomplish -- plus runs risk it will increase Putin's inclination to see this as a fight to the finish, raising odds he will reject compromise, escalate, or both," tweeted Richard Haass, a former administration official and president of the Centre for Foreign Relations.
"In last 24 hours there was a statement suggesting Russia might be reducing its war aims. Makes for an odd moment for US to expand its aims unless it has reason to believe doing so could help bring about internal change in Russia. Otherwise seems undisciplined/counter-productive," he added.
Outside of the flub, the speech, delivered at the historic Royal Castle in Warsaw, won high marks. Biden's Director of Speechwriting, Indian-American Vinay Reddy, who is the key wordsmith for the President, accompanied him on Air Force one, as did Neera Tanden, his senior advisor.
In his speech, Biden also reached out to the Russian people, telling them ("if you are able to listen") that they are not the enemy.
"I refuse to believe that you welcome the killing of innocent children and grandparents or that you accept hospitals, schools, maternity wards. This is not who you are. This is not the future you deserve for your families and your children.... This war is not worthy of you, the Russian people," he said.
But having called Putin a "war criminal" and a "butcher," a regime change, by whatever means, appears to be the only way there will be any high-level engagement between Washington and Moscow, with a break-down in communication between the two sides, something that did not happen even at the height of the Cold War.