The recent
Milan Summit with Ukraine, Russia and the European Union underscores once again
why simple diplomacy may not be the solution to the current Ukraine-Russia
crisis. That was strikingly evident from remarks made by Russian President
Putin questioning arrogantly the sovereignty of Ukraine so that even Germany's
Chancellor Angela Merkel felt compelled to reprimand the Russian President
reminding him of the Budapest Agreement of 1994. She could have mentioned many
more agreements and treaties to which Russia or its predecessor the USSR was a
signatory. A signature on a legally binding document means nothing to Putin or
Russia.
Ukraine's
President Poroshenko, also present in Milan, is not delusional. He know that
the only way to stop Russia's aggression is through deterrence, not diplomacy
or an appeal to Russia's sense of what is fair. By now most Western government
leaders have learned this. Chancellor
Merkel herself has come to a realization about her long time friend. Fora like
the Milan summit are afforded and will continue to be proposed in order to
enable President Putin to save face and acquiesce in some form of peaceful
arrangement, but only when sanctions and losses by Russia become unbearable.
However, for summits to have any success, Russia has to find itself in an
untenable position, pressed on all sides by a depressed Russian economy, a
Ukraine armed to the teeth and the West with the will and fortitude to stop
Russia.
A curious
phenomenon is that while Western leaders have learned the lesson of who is
Putin and what is Russia, many analysts in West continue to offer delusional
solutions and recommendations. Naturally, there are also pro Russian scribes
with a Russian agenda. Often it is difficult to distinguish between the
disingenuous and the simply delusional. Unfortunately, the distinction is often
imperceptible.
Consider
the following solution offered by some Western analysts: The U.S. and its NATO
allies should refrain from supplying weapons to Ukraine and limit visible
involvement in the conflict's military aspects while diplomatically
demonstrating its support for Ukraine. This in turn will disabuse Ukraine of
pursuing a military solution as well as encourage Ukraine to create a
sustainable defense, rather than strive to reacquire lost territory. In turn
this will bring Russia to the negotiating table with a viable and palatable
offer.
The script
could not have been better written in Moscow by Putin himself. This is
precisely what Russia wants – a confirmation of the “status quo” and a reward
for bad behavior. The result, however, is a death sentence not only for Ukraine
but for the civilized world and its ideals of democracy. Having been rewarded
for its aggression Russia will sit back temporarily, replenish its strength,
reinvigorate its economy and within a few years move on to the next adventure.
Ukraine will be the first to fall, but certainly, not the last.
This type
of strategy is wrong not only morally, but strategically. Furthermore, it plays
directly into Russian expectations that Russia will ultimately prevail because
the West does not want conflict, while Russia actually benefits from its
aggressive proclivities. Yes, even the
Russian people have been trained over centuries to be aggressors. Russia's
current nine time zones are not enough.
Aggression feeds the Russian bear. Unfortunately, many analysts in the
West even with the best intentions cannot comprehend the Russian mindset
because it is so foreign to our own.
There is
only one solution to the current Ukraine-Russia crisis – deterrence not
appeasement. The West tried appeasement in the past with Hitler, with
Stalin. It was only when the West moved
on to deterrence did the Soviet Union fall. Today Ukraine bears the brunt of
Russia's newest aggression. Ukraine has manifested a willingness to be the
West's, and, in particular, Europe's surrogate against this newest Russian
adventure. Sanctions against Russian and proving both non-lethal and lethal
weapons to Ukraine will stop Russia and compel it to join the negotiating
table, albeit reluctantly, with a
different mindset somewhere between its customary bad faith and the good faith
necessary for diplomacy to prevail. At that point diplomacy has a chance.
Putin's
Russia is a cancer not unlike ISIS. The difference is that Putin decapitates
and massacres in myriad forms and often
does it surreptitiously, simultaneously denying complicity. Yet every so often
he and his reps feel so emboldened by the West's naivete that they do or say
something outrageous. Malaysian Air Flight 17 was merely one example. Delusions
about and appeasement of Russia can only
end badly.
October 18,
2014
Askold S. Lozynskyj
Немає коментарів:
Дописати коментар