Monthly Archives: March 2014

Economic, European Union, Foreign Affairs, Government, Russia, Society, United Nations, United States

Diplomacy can help Ukraine survive. A military intervention by the west in Crimea is not an option…

Intro: The hard fact is that Russia, while a major part of the problem, also has to be part of the solution

The Russian defence ministry denied issuing an ultimatum to the Ukraine military positioned in Crimea that they would be attacked if they did not surrender by 3 am today. Russia claims this is but one of a number of provocations that has been issued, by whom it is not entirely clear. For many observers, though, this is a clear signal that Russian forces are intent in pushing into Crimea by having a head-on confrontation with Ukraine’s military. Quite probably, it is a Russian manoeuvre which sends out a blunt and sinister message – we are here to stay in Crimea to protect Russian interests and any calls for us to depart will fall on deaf ears.

Indeed, the strategic importance of Crimea to Russia is difficult to understate. It contains Russia’s main Black Sea naval base at Sevastopol. Without it, sea-lane transit to the Mediterranean becomes a lot harder, and any loss of such an asset would make Russia look a lot more vulnerable. Despite what others may wish for, Russia is not going to give up Crimea under almost any circumstances. While Europe and the United States can only hope that Russia will relinquish its Crimean stranglehold, many will acknowledge the lack of leverage the west has. Vladimir Putin can claim to be protecting his citizens in eastern and southern Ukraine against what has become a chaotic state where law does not rule. The history of Crimea clearly shows that this is a state which is hostile and threatening to its people.

Diplomacy is the west’s only tool and it has to recognise this. There is no question that military action can be taken in response. The hard fact is that Russia, while a major part of the problem, also has to be part of the solution. For how will restoring a lasting normalisation of life in Ukraine be possible unless Russia is part of that process?

Whilst tacticians will surely be right in their riposte that before normalisation can begin, the sabre-rattling has to stop and the military manoeuvring ended. But it is hardly something now that can be stopped overnight.

Coupled with the risk of military fighting breaking out, there is also the possibility that civilian groups might start attacking each other. Crimea is a state of some six religions and encompasses a wide and ethnic diversity. With ethnic and national tensions already inflamed, and with the rule of law so fractured, police forces would struggle to cope given that they are already notoriously distrusted. Restoring calm is urgently needed.

This is where western diplomacy can play a major role. Mr Putin can be threatened with diplomatic and economic isolation, such as those already issued by the United States and the European Union, but he can also be offered sweeteners in the form of emergency money that Ukraine will need to function and for it to repay its debts to Russia.

The task in resolving the dispute in Crimea is becoming increasingly more difficult by the day. This will not be helped if shots are fired which would risk provoking a major conflict.

Standard
Britain, Economic, Foreign Affairs, G8, Government, Russia, Society, Ukraine, United Nations, United States

Restraint by the West over Ukraine is needed…

UKRAINE

Intro: Mr Kerry infers a Russian policy of the playground bully, laying claim to another country’s territory and assets, because – perhaps accurately in calculation – there is no one with the strength to defy him

Throughout history, a host of rules have been built up about how nations should relate to one another. International diplomacy, largely a game of manners and etiquette, seeks to operate through points of protocol. A president, for example, as head of state, will outrank the standing of that country’s prime minister. But these rules may also be fundamental points of law, where the use of force, say, removes another country’s territorial sovereignty. In such circumstances, ostracism has to be the best punishment.

Diplomacy, as it happens, is also a game of power. When a nation with vast power and strength confronts one that has very little, there is not much the weaker party can do. This is reflective of what we are now seeing between Russia and Ukraine.

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, is likely to claim that by occupying Crimea is solely to do with protecting ethnic Russians and his country’s strategic interests. Such an argument was used by Mr Putin when Russian forces invaded Georgia in 2008 (in claiming the tiny mountain enclave of South Ossetia). The US Secretary of State, John Kerry, has said, however, that this should be deemed in the pretext of being ‘completely trumped-up.’ Mr Kerry infers a Russian policy of the playground bully, laying claim to another country’s territory and assets, because – perhaps accurately in calculation – there is no one with the strength to defy him.

This has become a crucial question for the West. Russia refuses to be constrained by international niceties, not only with its neighbours, but others too. Consider the example in Britain. Even if the Kremlin did not sanction the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, a Russian turned British spy, on British soil, it certainly did its level best to block and impede the investigation. If Mr Putin is willing to flagrantly breach the rules of the club of nations, why, then, should he be allowed to profit from membership?

While we should not be arguing that East-West relations be thrown back towards a Cold War philosophy, it is right that Western leaders question why Russia is worthy of G8 membership on its current form. Sochi was to play host to G8 in June, but that is now in jeopardy following Russian military manoeuvres in Ukraine.

It is generally accepted that there is little we or our allies can do, other than supporting the new government as best we can on the ground in Ukraine. Whether Mr Putin aims to seize wider territory in Ukraine, a gamble which seems unlikely, there is little doubt that Crimea is now de facto Russian territory and has been annexed.

Western countries will be fearful of confrontation with Russia, because it can seriously hurt Europe (at least in the short-term, economically). Russia controls the levers of oil and gas that flows through the Siberian Straits, any disruption to Europe would be hugely costly.

Standard
Economic, Government, Russia, Society, Ukraine, United Nations

An interventionist approach by Russia in Ukraine is highly dangerous…

Map of Ukraine highlighting Crimea and the strategic importance of Sevastopol on the south-west coast with ease of access to the Black Sea.

Map of Ukraine highlighting Crimea and the strategic importance of Sevastopol on the south-west coast with ease of access to the Black Sea.

Intro: As Vladimir Putin sabre-rattles over Ukraine, the situation is getting murkier

The appearance of armed men at airports in Crimea is a dangerous development in Ukraine’s messy and murky ‘revolution’. They have no insignia to say who they are, but their behaviour is one of a disciplined troop. It is fair to assume they are Russian. They are refusing to talk or elaborate on why they are there. Russia has its Black Sea fleet’s major naval base at the Crimean port of Sevastopol, and two air bases at the airports where the soldiers have appeared. Slightly more than half of the Crimean population identify themselves as being Russian, either by origin or allegiance. Reporters on the ground have even suggested that Russian envoys have been handing out Russian passports to those who want them.

Ominously, manoeuvrings are pointing in only one direction – that Russian president Vladimir Putin, who has deployed his tanks on Ukraine’s borders, has in fact moved some of his troops over the border. The Russian constitution allows for its armed forces to operate outside of Russia ‘in defence of Russian citizens.’ Seizing control of airfields could be a preparatory tactic before invading Crimea, or it might be a prelude in removing ‘Russians’ altogether.

To make matters worse, deposed Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich has resurfaced in Russia, following days on the run after his forced dethronement. Mr Yanukovich has declared that he wants to ‘fight for the Ukraine’ against what he has termed lawlessness and terror. He frequently refers to his usurpers as ‘neo-fascists’.

Russian intervention can only be seen as a highly dangerous move. Mr Putin must know that in this bitterly divided country such an incursion could lead to a bloody conflagration and a darkness comparable to that of the Cold War descending on East-West relations. Moscow will also understand that Mr Yanukovich is under investigation by western banking authorities for plundering his country’s wealth for personal gain. Yet, amid the turmoil, Russian preparations may also include an attempt to restore the discredited regime of Mr Yanukovich. The West should expect to hear a plethora of alibis and excuses as to why Russia is adopting an interventionist stance.

Sensibly, the new Ukrainian authorities under the country’s interim leadership have not risen to the bait. Whilst they do not yet have much authority over a large part of the country, they will be acutely aware that any escalation in belligerence could be the catalyst and excuse Mr Putin is looking for.

Diplomacy is still an option. Ukraine’s most pressing problem is that it is financially destitute. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) can provide loans for the purpose of restructuring an ailing economy, but so can Mr Putin. Most western leaders, too, appear to be willing to pay for a peaceful settlement, with Britain saying it will issue ‘blank signed cheques’ in helping Ukraine find its feet.

Geopolitically, understanding what Mr Putin wants will be a priority and key factor before any advances can be made. Whether that is complete tutelage over Ukrainian affairs or just considerable influence over a country that shares much of its history and culture with Russia, both of which will be an anathema to the protesting crowds in Kiev, a permanent settlement is still some way off. Convincing Mr Putin to keep his tanks away has to be the West’s prime objective.

Standard