Category Archives: United States

Britain, Economic, European Union, Government, Russia, Ukraine, United States

Drawing a line with Russia…

THE UKRAINIAN DICHOTOMY

Intro: The West should have concerns, and these should leave Mr Putin in no doubt that his forceful entries in Georgia in 2008 and now in Ukraine, cannot be allowed to extend to those former Soviet countries – such as in the Baltic States – that are now part of the European Union and NATO, but which also have Russian-speaking populations

A meeting of the NATO-Russia council earlier this week to discuss events unfolding in Ukraine was a welcome development in the efforts to defuse the crisis. Dialogue has been important because not only is ‘jaw-jaw’ better than ‘war-war’, but because of the need to minimise the risk of misunderstandings and misjudgements.

The West appears to have allowed the Russians to annex Crimea without the slightest of physical restraint, a position that has immediately led to the Kremlin redrawing the map of Russia that now contains and subsumes the southern region of Ukraine. The perception that the West was rather relaxed was reinforced when a document photographed in the hands of a British government security adviser appeared to rule out any direct response to Russian aggression in Crimea, whether military action or economic sanctions. There is also irony in the fact that Vladimir Putin says he did not aim in annexing the Crimea, a portrayal that will be impossible for some to untangle.

A political anomaly arose, too, when the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, said that Washington was reaffirming its guarantee of Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty and integrity as set out in the Budapest Declaration of 1994, which the UK is also a party and signatory to. How, though, this can possibly extend to keeping Crimea within Ukraine is not clear. Even if sanctions are off-limits – for the Government will be acutely aware that any British sanctions could soon backfire, such as energy supplies from Russia to Europe being curtailed or Russian capital outflights from the City of London – it is difficult to see Mr Putin being cowed by diplomatic isolation or the cancellation of the planned G8 summit in Sochi in June. No doubt, the Russian leader can probably have confidence in the quickly arranged referendum planned for March 30, which will aim to grant greater autonomy for Crimea, to do his annexation for him.

But the West should have concerns, and these should leave Mr Putin in no doubt that his forceful entries in Georgia in 2008 and now in Ukraine, cannot be allowed to extend to those former Soviet countries – such as in the Baltic States – that are now part of the European Union and NATO, but which also have Russian-speaking populations.

John Kerry said the United States did not seek a confrontation with Russia, but will stand-by Ukraine. How, when US sanctions on Russia has already led to Mr Putin selling billions of dollars’ worth of his country’s gold in propping up the Russian Rouble? Further volatility on the Russian currency could have a devastating effect on the livelihoods of almost all Russians.

Standard
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