Is the West’s impotence a result of the Ukraine war?
As of the last three weeks, Volodymyr Zelenskyy has emerged as the kind of talismanic leader who does as he says, perhaps the most fearless, resilient, and determined people against the mighty Russian war machine, the world has ever seen. The underdog is all the rage here, a good old-fashioned David versus Goliath scenario.
The West has been sorely disappointed by Putin’s aggression if he was counting on it to crumble in its face.
Moreover, he sought to play on NATO’s inadequacies and exploit the alliance’s weaknesses. Western nations, instead, seem to have coalesced around a corporate, multinational sanctions package of unprecedented magnitude against Russia, coupled with indirect military assistance to the Ukrainian military.
Nevertheless, will this united front hold together as time passes? Sanctions impact both sides equally. For the rest of Europe, what is the price of defending democracy in Ukraine?
The US and Europe may be united in condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but their plans for military action are, for now, uncoordinated. NATO has repeatedly emphasized that it will not send troops on the ground or deploy planes in the air. Last week, Poland offered its MIG jets to Ukraine and now proposes to send peacekeepers to the country.
One of the problems here is that Ukraine is not a member of NATO, but how do you transition from pissed into their tent from the outside to pissed from the inside? Does there need to be a red line? Should Lithuania be attacked? Poland? Putting lives on the line is a much bigger deal than financial measures.
Over the past five decades, the West has engaged in several disastrous military campaigns overseas, leaving them unsettled, profoundly out of pocket, and less inclined to watch over geopolitical and democratic affairs around the globe. In addition, a member of the global community associated with liberal democratic values has vacated the scene rather inconveniently.
Having left the EU, Britain has been reduced to persona non grata in international politics, and it has occupied a back seat during the current round of negotiations at best. It went from being the global leader to becoming a bit player in just five short years. How did we get here?
NATO is the primary shield to protect the interests of the United States in Europe. In the mid-90s, the Clinton administration held strong views on this issue. The US administration decided that adding new members in the east of Europe was the only way to ensure peace in the region, despite the lack of any imminent threat of war in Europe (US/Russian relations were beginning to thaw nicely at the time) at the time.
Anyone could guess what further benefits a larger NATO might bring. Despite that, NATO expanded to Poland, Hungary, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania. No one can deny that Putin’s delusion of history and his desire to restore the USSR to its former glory drive the current conflict. However, adding western influence right up to Russia’s borders and threatening its sense of security is like poking the bear. Prepare yourself for the sting.
Therefore, Putin is no longer content with simply forcing NATO back into its box. As part of his plan to incite a war between the West and Russia, he invaded Ukraine.
The current developments in Ukraine are not an impulse move but rather a plan that has been made for a long time. As one article published on November 2018, Brexit was the first domino to fall on the path towards war in Europe. The UK decided to leave the most significant trade bloc globally after a shock referendum result. It seemed impossible at the time, but it becomes much less shocking when you look back and consider who stood to benefit from the chaos that ensued.
The upheaval not only gave the domestic political class plenty of cash but also gave Putin:
1) a polarized EU
2) a neutered, isolationist UK.
In addition to the pandemic, he wasn’t expecting the additional tension in the bloc caused by the epidemic.
Many evidence points to Russian involvement in both the EU referendum and the 2016 presidential elections that resulted in (anti-NATO) Trump becoming president.
How do we proceed? The chances of diplomatic talks succeeding are slim. Vladimir Putin cannot turn back; it would be devastating for his domestic standing. From the “special operations” in Ukraine, he needs to demonstrate some benefits. Does the international community have the power to restrain Putin, or will he follow the lead of other old Soviet states?
Generally, sanctions take a longer time to take effect. Furthermore, it is possible to move cash and assets without being detected with today’s complex financial systems. Even though Russians are prohibited from using SWIFT, they can partially circumvent restrictions by using nominee accounts, cryptocurrencies, and securities settlement systems.
Russian oil is another option. Concerning the war in Europe, countries like India and China (the emerging Asian bloc) could not care less which side of history they fell on. The two countries face economic problems, so securing their interests is their priority.
It would be better to remind India and China that they do way more business with the US and the EU than with Russia rather than rebuking them for buying Russian oil (as Biden has done in the last few days). It would be economically foolish to risk these flows to make money fast with Russia. Furthermore, rebuking them when the West is still buying oil from Russia is not only hypocritical but also somewhat hypocritical.
Right now, there is no clear path out of the current situation. There is no empathy among Putin’s opponents, and it frightens one to think about the destructive power he still possesses. Putin is likely to come out all guns blazing if he feels he is losing the war. The N-word has already been mentioned. Would someone within his circle be able to “remove” him? Are the Russians going to rebel?
There is no doubt about it. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has forced a reevaluation of the region’s geopolitics. Unchallenged Russian expansion could spell the end of NATO, a complete remapping of Europe’s political landscape, or worse. Seventy-five years of peace cannot be inevitably snuffed out like this as a free world. The democratic process cannot be subordinated to autocracy. Peace is sometimes fought for, in an unorthodox way. How willing is the West to fight for peace? Putin is betting that it won’t be.
