Monday, March 24, 2014
Will Europe Pay a Territorial Price for Timidity in Facing Down Putin?
Ukraine's new government in Kiev ordered its troops to retreat from Crimea today, ending days of indecision in which Western leaders tried to present a unified response to Russia's tightening grip on the Crimean peninsula. Russian forces have been routinely seizing Ukrainian ships and military installations in Crimea, including a naval base near the eastern Crimean port of Feodosia, where two injured servicemen were taken captive today, while as many as 80 were detained, Ukrainian officials reported. Over the weekend, Russian troops stormed the Belbek air force base near Sevastopol and detained the commander. With the storming of at least three military facilities over the past three days - and the decision by some to switch to the Russian side - it isn't clear how many Ukrainian troops remain in Crimea. For example, the former Ukraine navy chief, who was charged with treason by the Ukraine government after he swore allegiance to the Russian-backed Crimean authorities and urged others to defect, was named a deputy chief of Russia's Black Sea Fleet by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu during his visit to Crimea on Monday to inspect the Black Sea Fleet, which has been stationed in Crimea under an agreement with Ukraine that allowed Moscow to have up to 25,000 troops on the peninsula. Denis Berezovsky had been appointed commander of Ukraine's navy on March 1, only to surrender the country's base in the port of Sevastopol to pro-Russian forces a day later. Acting Ukrainian President Oleksandr Turchnynov, whose new government is struggling to maintain contol and establish itself, said the Defense Ministry has been ordered to withdraw all servicemen in Crimea to Ukraine's mainland. Turchnynov said Ukrainian troops would be evacuated with their families in response to unspecified threats from what he termed occupying Russian forces. The interim government in Kiev has been criticized for its indecision over Ukrainian troops in Crimea, and some Ukrainian troops have already left their bases. Moscow says its absorption of Crimea has been rendered legitimate by a referendum held earlier this month in which the bulk of voters in the peninsula approved the move, but the process has come under sustained criticism from the international community. ~~~~~ While Russia's takeover of Ukraine is in practical terms complete and Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev continues to provide economic aid to Crimea, and has promised that Crimeans will continue receiving pensions and subsidies even after the region switches to the Russian ruble, the West seems to be shifting its attention to Ukraine. US President Barack Obama's agenda will be filled with Ukraine as he begins a week of international travel in the Netherlands, where he was set to attend a nuclear security summit, which has been overshadowed by last-minute talks on Ukraine among the Group of Seven industrialized economies - the US, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan. Seeking to intensify pressure on Moscow, western powers met to discuss methods for isolating Russia. British Prime Minister David Cameron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel said today that a summit scheduled for June in Sochi was now off the table, while the United States warned that Russia's global standing would continue to deteriorate as the West presents a united front against Putin. The G-7 warned that Russia will face increasing separation from the powerful Group of Eight world powers unless it changes course in Ukraine. "As long as the political environment for the G-8 is not there, as at the moment, there is no G-8 - neither as a concrete summit nor as a format," Merkel said. Leaders of the reconstituted Group of Seven - Russia excluded - met today at the Dutch prime minister's residence to sketch out a path forward. President Obama's deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, said the meeting was arranged to outlne "what economic sanctions Russia will be faced with if it continues down this course." He said the G-7 would also discuss assistance for the Ukrainian government, indicating that the US and other nations were not prepared to formally cut Russia out of the G-8. The President declared that the US and Europe stand together behind Ukraine : "We're united in imposing a cost on Russia for its actions so far," Obama said. Obama also sought to garner support from China, one of Moscow's closest allies, during one-on-one talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping. China often sides with Russia against the West, but US officials are appealing to Beijing's well-known opposition to outside interference in another nation's domestic affairs. Obama was careful in pre-meeting statements before sitting down with the Chinese president, saying only that they would discuss Ukraine. When the UN Security Council voted on a resolution declaring Crimea's secession referendum illegal, Russia vetoed the measure, the 13 other council members voted in favor, and China's abstention isolated Moscow internationally. In contrast, the BRIC partners, a group of five major emerging economies - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - issued a statement Monday opposing sanctions and urging nations to work through the UN instead. The so-called BRICS nations said hostile language, sanctions and force do not "contribute to a sustainable and peaceful solution." ~~~~~ Dear readers, even though Russian officials have been very circumspect about the precise number of Russian troops in Crimea, last week Ukraine estimated that 60,000 Russian troops were massed near Crimea's borders with Ukraine. Today, the estimate was raised to 100,000. This is the real issue facing the G-7 as it meets in Amsterdam. One must ask what Vladimir Putin's intentions are. He says he has no expansionist plans - but taking Crimea was not expansionist for Putin because he and the Russians he represents believe that Crimea has always been Russian. If one were Vladimir Putin, it would not be difficult to make the same argument about Ukraine. And then? The Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania)? Moldova? And even Romania and Bulgaria. The world could see the reconstruction of much of the Soviet eastern European bloc. And how effective are economic and political sanctions against such a Russian military advance through eastern Europe? Not at all. NATO and the US, with their European allies, have military capabilities far superior to Russia's. If Western Europe does not want to see its eastern border move radically westward, it needs to develop a strategy far more robust than sanctions. Or pay the territorial price for its timidity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe that there is a price to be paid for the lack of an aggressive Western (United States & EU) policy towards Putin's yet definable actions. The placements of superficial sanctions against Russia is a simple irritant rather than a stopping actions that has some "teeth" to it.
ReplyDeleteFor all the evidence of a global system of governments that are broken, there is unequivocal evidence that the long road goes on forever with or without them.
His is a huge "wake-up" call for Western Europe. Here they have invested almost 25 years in developing economic and political relationships withe the Russian Federation where none existed before with the old Soviet Union. Europe now relies on Russian energy and Russia relies on western investment and quality consumer goods and industrial systems. The objective was to create interdependencies for mutual benefit. To a great extent that has happened.
ReplyDeleteThe NATO mission was to defend Europe against the Soviet Union. That mission disappeared, and with that, hundreds of military bases in Europe were closed because the serious threat was gone. Yes, a number of former soviet satellites joined NATO for mutual support and a degree of protection. But they add little in the way of offensive military strength. Example, Estonia with a population of 1.3 million has a army of 3,200 soldiers. That is roughly the size of the Phoenix, Arizona police department.
Now that Russia has become a threat again, those two decades of relationships have been harmed and I think you will see a slow disengagement of Western Europe from Russia, and the strengthening of national military forces in Europe. Russia has just clearly demonstrated that it cannot be trusted to be a peaceful nation.
In the view of Putin’s record, it seems just to judge him and his men of violence by their deeds and not by their words.
Delete“For last year's words belong to last year's language. And next year's words await another voice.”
― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets
The bottom line is that Russia can withstand 0% growth and outflow of capital. They have substantial natural resources that go only up in price and they have a system now where Putin controls information and all forms of government, so even if people are unhappy, they cannot really protest. You need some sort of a catastrophic collapse of the economy for Russians to be willing to go in the streets and under tanks.... and that will not be achieved by sanctions alone.
ReplyDeleteWho isn’t mesmerized and concerned by the radical leaders that are presiding over the various third world countries with nuclear weapons? Meantime, Russian leadership, which for two decades has not produce anything, except supplying the world with raw materials, which make only the ruling elite richer. Only thanks to "foreign policy experts" and demagogues in US and EU, whose shortsighted policies and maybe a personal interest, prevented civilized world from becoming energy independent, thus enabling dictators throughout the world, whether it is Russia, or Arab sheikhs, being able to use pipeline valves as a weapons. Any kind of concerted efforts by Western politicians and industrialists could bring Russian economy to near breaking point very fast. The thing the West should keep in mind is that the like of a Putin, when realizing his gross miscalculation, can get out of control, and start much more dangerous escapades, if not somehow defused.
ReplyDeleteWith all the diplomatic struggles are being played out over Ukraine and Crimea, isn’t it strange that Obama would pick now to unleash his newest attack dog – Ms. Susan Rice to defend our experience lacking Secretary of State and threaten Israel from any further criticism of his (Kerry) positions on world matters.
ReplyDeleteAnd concurrently nominates Ms. Nonie Darwsh as the new “Legal Advisor to the State Department” Ms. Darwsh is an outright supported and advocate for Sharia Law to be honored and adhered to in all US courts and Federal matter.
Is this another Obama end run while the attention is direct at Russia?
The United States needs to be equally (at least) concerned with its own presidential slight-of-hand moves as it is with what is going on in the EU’s backyard.
It was painful enough to watch Kofi Anan elevated to Secretary General even though as head of UN peace-keeping forces worldwide he sent two now infamous cables to Dallaire forbidding him from any efforts to stop the genocide (the cables are on display in the Kigali Genocide Memorial).
DeleteIt’s nearly as painful watching Rice lecture the Jewish state, which lost one third of its entire people in a genocide of four short years, lecture the Jews about how unacceptable it is for them to criticize those who claim to know how to protect them better than they know themselves.
Threats and sanctions won't do a lot to hurt Mr Putin but action would.
ReplyDeleteBecause of the German government tends to base its decisions on pragmatism, not moralism. In other words, it’s not whether an action is morally right or wrong, but whether that action helps advance German interests.
ReplyDeleteIt's so interesting that any American can sit back and talk about another country putting pragmatism over morality, we direct nearly all countries based on our pragmatism!
Secondly, if the US thinks that the EU is going to stop purchasing all of their fossil fuels and power from Russia they are delusional. That would spike up costs because it would all have to be shipped in from farther away and it would finish crushing the Eurozone and every economy attached to it.
Lastly, why would Germany rush to support our goals that would only hurt their economy? When they demanded the repatriation of all of the gold that the US Fed was supposedly holding for them as collateral for their US paper money, they were essentially told "No."
We've stolen and destroyed the autonomy of anyone we pretend is an ally. If push comes to shove I truly believe that the US stands alone against the BRICS nations and the EU does not have the strength of financial security to back us in any way other than empty threats.
What did the West do over the last decade to put in place obstacles for Putin who obviously knows his game of chess well? What military or economic road blocks did we place and what conflicts did we link to the sustained Independence of Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Moldavia, Georgia etc.? I am talking about Syrian and Iranian issues (not to mention Putin's reading of the Start II) as well as France selling military ships and the US buying Russian helicopters for Afghanistan. Instead it appears we wrote some of the script Putin is using. And I include public pressure concerning the lack of Russian peacekeepers anywhere, the sorry state of journalism in Russia or their continued assistance to NK, Iran, and Belarus etc. (much of it done is secret)
ReplyDeleteWhat have we in the West done (or even reported) about several facts leading to Putin's ability to successfully frame the issues for Russian speaking people? Did the US under Clinton limit Russian high technology and military sales to former Soviet buyers like Gaddafi, Assad and Khomeini under the Gore Understanding? Did the IMF handle the denationalization of Soviet assets fairly? Did the West conduct itself properly in economic involvement in former Soviet vassals and bring about an honest and uncorrupted Orange Revolution?
I simply fail to see how anyone can select the narrow stage of Bad Russian/ Good Westerner motif and exclude what is apparently both obvious to Russians and many Americans. Until we do and create both here and abroad obstacles for the intolerant forces in the world, those that control us in the West can now say it’s either us or "them". They have created or enabled quite a good set of monsters that cannot be separated from where we go now in Ukraine. What has happened was predictable theater. And many could see long ago. Or in Mitt Romney's case 2 years ago. But at least he saw it with some time to act.
Did Obama even want to act or re-act? - NO
"Obama: No, Romney Was Wrong. Russia Is Weak, Not Strong."
DeleteThis is a headline from an online news site.
This is the blindness that will only push Putin on in his quest