Day: May 8, 2014
Why Putin maybe blinked
It is easy to predict how many babies will be born next year. It is hard to predict who the individual mothers will be. That’s one of the important lessons in international affairs, where the decisions of unique individuals often matter.
Forty-eight hours after I posted that we should expect worse in Ukraine, Vladimir Putin decided to lower the tension. He claims to have withdrawn Russian troops from the Ukrainian border and to have asked the Russian-speaking insurgents in eastern and southern Ukraine not to conduct a May 11 referendum on independence. The US and NATO are saying they’ve seen no evidence of either claim. He is also sounding amiable about the May 25 presidential election that Kiev is organizing.
What made Putin blink? I don’t know. Maybe the significant declines in Russia’s credit rating, stock market and currency since he started up the Ukraine crisis. Maybe some of the sanctions are starting to bite. Maybe the withdrawals from his St. Petersburg economic forum weighed heavily. Maybe the Swiss President, who met with Putin just before he made his comments about Ukraine, said something about personal or institutional finance that gave the Russian President pause. Maybe it’s all a ruse to catch the West off balance and tomorrow he’ll invade.
Whatever his tactical maneuvers, Putin will not lose sight of his strategic goal: to dominate the Russian-speaking areas of eastern and southern Ukraine and deprive Kiev of the authority it needs to counter Moscow’s preferences, including its opposition to Ukrainian membership in NATO and a closer relationship with the EU. The cheapest and easiest way to achieve his purposes is autonomy for the Russian-speaking provinces, and some sort of “entity” binding them together. He is all too familiar with recent precedents for this: Republika Srpska in Bosnia and the Association of Serb Municipalities in Kosovo.
No doubt some degree of decentralization will be part of the solution in Ukraine. It is not only American communities that want to run their own schools, provide services, maintain their own infrastructure and manage their own revenues. The Federal government has little to say about my daily life. I interact far more often with the District of Columbia, which collects much of its own revenue and in many respects governs itself, despite the residue of Congressional oversight that no state has to put up with.
What Kiev has to be careful about is to maintain its authority over foreign affairs, defense, the judiciary and at least some of the forces of law and order. It also needs a supremacy clause, like the one in the existing constitution, that enables it to override local decisions that threaten the integrity of the state, including the holding of referenda on independence.
Putin is not going to be interested in decentralization, which would block him from the kind of dominant position in Ukraine that he seeks. Decentralization to provincial administrations will make it more difficult for Russian-speakers to unify and fight Kiev, even if it enables them a wide margin of control over the services provided within the provinces.
My best guess is that Putin blinked to provide some time for negotiations to produce the result he wants. President Obama is not the only one who prefers not to use military force but instead accomplish his ends by diplomatic means.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What the Syrian opposition wants
Yesterday morning the US Institute of Peace hosted President Ahmad Jarba, head of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, for his first public address in DC. Ambassador William B. Taylor moderated.
President Jarba described the Syrian crisis as one of the most dramatic human catastrophes in modern times. It is more than Syrians can handle. Originally Syrians had gone out to demand the dignity that was taken away from them more than 40 years ago. The Assad family has ruled Syria with an iron fist and deprived its people of human rights and political dignity. “Have you ever heard of a ruler who would bombard his own people with Scud missiles, chemical weapons, and torture detainees in prison?” President Jarba asked. Syrians have experienced all sorts of violence and degradation. All efforts must come together to save Syrians from this bloody chain of events, which worsens every day. The Syrian opposition opposes terrorism and extremism. But there is a distinction to be made between Jabhat al Nusra, an extremist group of mostly Syrians that fights the regime, and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which includes a lot of non-Syrians and does not fight the regime. Assad’s forces never attack ISIS because it is in league with the regime. The opposition seeks a political solution. They went to Geneva with a positive attitude. As Lakhdar Brahimi said, the Assad regime was responsible for the failure of the political process. The opposition will always strive to reach a political solution. Geneva failed but even now a political solution is what the opposition seeks. This will not happen by nominating the criminal Assad again for the presidency. He wants to run for office on the dead bodies of Syrians. If this succeeds, it will be an international license for Assad to kill more of his people for many years to come. There must be a strong stance against this bloodthirsty tyrant. The opposition is trying to establish an interim government to operate in liberated areas. But Assad’s air force burns and attacks Syrians on a daily basis. This blocks progress in liberated areas. The opposition needs weapons to eliminate the burning barrels that fall on residential buildings and kill civilians. The balance of power must be changed on the ground for real political progress in Syria to take place.
Ambassador Taylor asked if the regime was winning. What can the opposition do to reverse this? The Homs agreement is on people’s minds. What are the opposition’s plans for the immediate future? President Jarba replied that Homs is important for the Syrian revolution. Many consider it the core of opposition. However, the war is not just about gaining or losing a city. It’s about the whole conflict. Even if Homs is completely controlled by the opposition, no one will be secure because of the air raids and barrel bombs. The main goal is to end the conflict. One of the best ways of doing this is to have a weapon that can respond to the air raids. The opposition is gaining ground in a lot of cities. On a humanitarian level the situation is horrible, but the military situation on the ground is not as bad as some believe. The opposition is losing and gaining ground, just like in other conflicts. The opposition can defeat the regime, but the main problem is the air force.
Ambassador Taylor: What specifically do you want the US to do or not do? Are there specific things you want the US to do to end conflict?
President Jarba answered that Syrians do not want the US to send in troops to fight. He thanked the US for politically supporting the opposition at the UN Security Council. The US has always supported any resolution emanating from the Security Council, despite Russian veto. The US has also supported Syria at a humanitarian level, which hopefully it will continue to do. The opposition has a problem with air raids and barrel bombs. The opposition wants weapons that would be able to neutralize Assad’s air force. The opposition needs effective, efficient weapons in the right hands. The opposition is committed to keeping them in the right hands. Also, the opposition wants political resolution towards a transitional government. This is the only solution to bring back stability and to allow for Assad to leave country.
RSS - Posts
