Day: February 28, 2022
Stevenson’s army, February 28
– David Frum explains the economic problems Russia faces.
– NYT notes Germany’s pivot.
– NYT explains Israel’s balancing act.
– WaPo notes Russian military problems.
– WSJ says Putin manifesto was required reading in Moscow last summer.
– Tears on K Street.for Russia’s lobbyists.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What happens in Ukraine won’t stay in Ukraine
Here are the speaking notes I prepared on the Balkans and Middle East for this noon’s event on “What’s Next for Russia, Ukraine, and the World?” It featured Johns Hopkins/SAIS faculty:
Balkans
- American policy since the end of the Cold War has aimed at “Europe whole and free.” That isn’t going to happen so long as Putin or someone of his ilk rules Russia.
- Serbia claims neutrality, but its current leadership advocates a “Serbian world” akin to Putin’s “Russian world.” Belgrade also refuses to sanction Moscow. De facto Serbia is siding with Russia.
- That puts Bosnia, Kosovo, and NATO member Montenegro at risk from Serb irredentism.
- The line between democracies and autocracies will therefore also be drawn through the Balkans unless Belgrade changes its inclinations.
Countering Russian ambitions and Moscow’s Serb proxies needs higher priority:
- Deployment of an additional 500 EU troops to Bosnia is a good first step. But more are needed. The UK should augment that deployment. The US should beef up the military presence in Brcko and move some troops to northern Kosovo .
- The EU should tell Serbia that continued adherence to neutrality in Ukraine will result in a halt to the EU accession process.
- The US, UK, and EU should end bilateral and multilateral assistance to Republika Srpska and threaten likewise to Serbia.
Middle East
In the Middle East, the situation is more ambiguous. The interests at stake are less compelling and US policy more accepting of autocracy:
- Syria backs Russia and Iran is attempting the Chinese straddle (for peace but against Ukrainian membership in NATO). Egypt, the UAE, and other small Gulf monarchies are ducking for cover. Saudi Arabia so far has decided to enjoy high oil prices.
- Israel has backed Ukraine, but cautiously to avoid Russian retaliation against its interests in Syria and domestic political complications. Turkey has also backed Ukraine, less cautiously.
- Ultimately, the Middle East will go with the flow. If Russia is successful, no one in the Middle East will refuse to maintain diplomatic relations with a puppet government in Kyiv.
- OPEC+ will gain traction and Russian inroads in the Middle East will expand.
- But if Russia fails, the Middle East countries, democracies and autocracies alike, will claim they supported Ukraine, even if OPEC+ suffers irreparable damage.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Belgrade and Banja Luka should draw the right conclusions
Here is an interview I did for Rasim Belko of Patria, a Sarajevo-based news agency, on the repercussions of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in Bosnia and Herzegovina:
Q: Before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, you announced that Russia would continue to destabilize the Western Balkans. Will Putin go to war with the West in another hotbed such as the Balkans?
A: Russia isn’t going to war in the Balkans, where it has few military resources. But it uses its proxies there to de-stabilize: Serb nationalist organizations, Dodik, and Vucic.
The danger of Bosnian collapse is not the issue
Q: Bosnia and Herzegovina is a key focal point of the Balkans. In your opinion, how real is the danger of its collapse?
A: I would not call the risk “collapse.” There is a real possibility that Dodik will go too far and provoke a response.
Nor is NATO membership for now
Q: Many believe that Bosnia and Herzegovina should be admitted to NATO under a shortened procedure. Do you think it is realistic that this will happen soon?
A: The pre-condition is consensus within the Bosnian leadership. So far as I can tell, that does not exist. I doubt NATO be interested in enlargement so long as the crisis with Russia continues. But eventual NATO membership is certainly possible. I have no problem with Bosnians pressing for a “shortened procedure.”
Separatism demands a vigorous response
Q: Milorad Dodik’s separatist policy is Putin’s dangerous extended arm in the heart of Europe. Have the US and the EU missed the chance to address this threat to peace in the Western Balkans in time?
A: They have waited too long, but there is still time. What has been lacking is political will. The invasion of Ukraine may help the US, UK, and EU find the political will.
Q: Is it time for more concrete and stronger measures of the West towards such a policy of Milorad Dodik?
A: Yes. All international funding that finds its way to Republika Srpska should be cut off.
Serbia has reason to hesitate
Q: Serbia and its President Aleksandar Vučić sided with Russia, and at the same time they are continuously working from Serbia against the sovereignty and integrity of BiH. In your opinion, does Europe have grounds for fear of a Serbian invasion of BiH, like Putin on Ukraine?
A: Nothing about the Russian invasion of Ukraine so far should encourage Serbia. Even Milosevic opted not to intervene openly in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I imagine Vucic will not want to take the risk.
Q: How do you see the outcome around Ukraine and what are the possible consequences for Europe, and especially in relation to the Western Balkans?
A: A quick Russian victory in Ukraine would have been bad news for the Balkans, as it would have encouraged Serb irredentism. In addition, many Serbs in Republika Srpska and in northern Kosovo would welcome an invasion more than the Ukrainians did. That said, things have gone so badly so far for Russia that even a victory would not be very rewarding. And Western solidarity has been strong. Belgrade and Banja Luka should be able to draw the right conclusions.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Biden merits applause, but Zelensky should take his bows
Conventional wisdom, including my own, has it that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine will fundamentally change the world in which we live. Power will become its own raison d’etre. Geopolitics will return not only in national security strategy documents but also in the use of force. Europe will be neither whole nor free, but divided and half unfree. Democracy will need to steel itself for a long struggle with autocracy, not only in Europe but also in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.
The other, long-term scenario
But there is another possible scenario emerging, due to the courage and commitment of Ukrainians in general and President Zelensky first and foremost. Russia may taste defeat and need to retreat to heal its wounds and even change its leadership. A free and democratic Ukraine might shake off the trauma of war and re-emerge as a reformed and consolidated state. NATO might be unified as well as enlarged and Europe reinvigorated. Russia might after a while put itself on a democratric path, pay reparations to Ukraine, and return chastened to the world community.
That is a future worth hoping for. The pre-condition however is Russian defeat. Today’s collapse of the ruble, hike in interest rates, and closure of the Russian stock market are good indications.
But the short-term doesn’t look good
Putin will nevertheless double down on his effort to subdue Ukraine. He has no choice. He knows that defeat would be the end of his rule.
That is bad news in the short run for Ukrainians. Russia will lay siege to their cities, bombard civilians, and try to murder Zelensky and the rest of the governing elite. The odds of a Ukrainian win are not good.A week from now the war could look different. The resources, manpower, technology, and ruthlessness are preponderately on Moscow’s side. Moral superiority does not often win wars without those factors.
Even though Europe, the UK, and the US are doing the right things
The world’s major central banks are shutting down relations with Russia, making its massive hard currency reserves inaccessible. Europe has sanctioned Putin and agreed to limit SWIFT transactions of Russians banks. Germany has not only raised its defense spending but is also allowing transfer of weapons to Ukraine. The US and UK have orchestrated pre-emptive use of intelligence as well as dramatic financial sanctions. NATO is strengthening deployments in its eastern-most members.
This is a sterling performance of solidarity in defense of a democratic government.
Biden deserves a lot of credit
President Biden merits credit for much of this Western solidariety. He took his eye off the ball and botched Afghanistan. Ukraine is an entirely different story. Often leading from behind and allowing the Europeans to look good, Biden has managed this crisis well.
I dread to think what might have happened if Trump had still been president. His bozotic praise for Putin and fake bravado could well have taken this crisis off the rails. None of the Republicans criticizing the Administration for not doing more faster against Putin have given a moment’s thought to what is required to keep the Europeans on board and get them out front.
Biden deserves applause tomorrow night when he gives his State of the Union address. But I hope to see the day President Zelensky can take his bows.
RSS - Posts
