“Everything has already been said, but not yet by everybody.” This quote by the Bavarian comedian Karl Valentin applies also to the ongoingthreat to , which has brought a new level of tension to Europe. Yet it provides no comic relief as the situation is far too dangerous for everyone, but especially for the people of who have been widely excluded from the ongoing discussions about their future.
The diplomatic failures of the excessive list of demands shows that it doesn’t expect the West to agree. It would, conversely, mean that would have to remove its own missiles from the Kaliningrad Oblast that borders Poland and Lithuania.and American negotiators and the steady escalation in rhetoric indicate an unwillingness to compromise on both sides. wants guarantees that neither nor Georgia will accede to NATO, which NATO categorically refuses to do. But
Coming to Terms With the Game Being Played on the Russia-Ukraine Border
The failure of theFederation to respect the sovereign will of its neighboring states demonstrates well its 19th-century view of geopolitics that if it doesn’t belong to us now, it will soon belong to our enemies. By raising the stakes, has shown that there are now only three options for — siding with , aligning with the West, or permanent neutrality — and it is testing to see just how much the West really wants . But time is running out. Maintaining a large standing army on such a long border requires significant resources. They’ll have to be moved eventually. The question is, in which direction?
Like pieces on a chessboard,acceding to NATO would, from the alliance’s perspective, be like the West gaining a pawn. From the view of the Kremlin, however, would be losing its queen. The movement of NATO’s eastern flank into would increase the length of the NATO- land border nearly fourfold, from 703 kilometers to 2,677 kilometers — an unpleasant prospect for security-obsessed Moscow.
As such, we believe that there are several scenarios regarding how the situation could develop, with a multitude of compounding factors. Three of them have been described here, which we still believe could prove most likely.
While it is impossible to know what will actually happen, one thing seems to be perfectly clear: There is no peaceful solution for. Regardless of what outcome the negotiations have, Crimea is still occupied and the war in Donbas is ongoing. The Kremlin wants security guarantees, but so does . Kyiv sees its best option in NATO membership, which is mutually exclusive to Moscow’s objective.
It’s at this point that the debate aboutneutrality gains momentum. Such a declaration of neutrality could also be welcome in Western capitals. Although this currently disregards the stated sovereign will of those who support a Western path, one could nonetheless imagine a tripartite (NATO/US– – Federation) treaty on neutrality would ease security fears, while also not excluding the prospect of future EU membership for the country, like neutral Austria, Sweden and Finland. Indeed, the stability provided by a neutrality treaty would afford the necessary conditions for significant economic growth and democratization.
Nevertheless, the Kremlin’s security concerns regarding NATO are, to our understanding, not the dominant factor in this situation. Apart from the fact that there is also a sort of collective security provision in Article 42 (7) of the Treaty of the European Union, the main concern for the numerous occasions, could thrive in a climate of social freedom, the population could demand this as well, which would ultimately lead to the collapse of the current administration.regime is a democratic and prosperous . Because if a “brotherly” nation, as has referred to it on
Neutrality, moreover, doesn’t also necessarily prevent a peacekeepers,” following the war in Transnistria in 1992. Andreas Umland, an analyst at the Stockholm Centre for Eastern European Studies, the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, asked (during a conference both authors attended) whether these and other troops stationed in the former Soviet republics should not rather be referred to as “piece keepers” — pun intended.military presence. In Moldova — a neutral country — around 2,000 soldiers are present, 500 of them as “
Umland is also the initiator of an open letter to the German government signed by 73 German experts on Eastern Europe and international security, among them one of the authors of this article. The aim here is to call for a German reaction to the threat the Federation poses to the European security order.
Europe’s Energy Leverage
The new German government hasn’t changed its predecessor’s position regarding the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would provide leverage in the negotiations but is constantly depoliticized by officials. Moreover, drastic sanctions, like excluding from the SWIFT global payment system or even delivering defensive weapons to , have been ruled out. The latter is based on what Berlin perceives as its historic responsibility toward for Germany’s role in the Second World War, ironically ignoring that this should also include as both were part of the Soviet Union.
But a time is coming when Berlin must weigh up whether it is willing to stand in solidarity with its allies,and the principles of international law and self-determination, or if its responsibilities for the past mean it would rather stay in the Kremlin’s good books. In any case, this German factor has long provided the Kremlin with the opportunity to pursue its divide-and-conquer strategy in the European Union.
Perhaps the greatest leverage the EU would have over Europe’s reliance on natural resources. Dependence works both ways, and if the EU, and especially Germany, were to take control and shut off pipelines into Europe, the consequences would be far worse for .(and currently vice versa) is the control over the supply of natural gas. Moscow has for far too long fostered
Painful though it may be at first, it is entirely possible, and such a preemptive tactic — showingthat the EU is no longer dependent on its supplies — would have a powerful taming effect on Moscow. It would also spur on the increased diversification of European supplies, costing Europe less in the long run. This card is currently in German hands.
Negotiations aside, one of the most striking things about this current escalation has been the sidelining of Ukraine’s position. If we’ve learned anything from history, it is that smaller countries should not be overlooked as their voices are silenced. We’ve seen this situation before: excessive demands, promises of being satisfied if conditions are met, protecting citizens, peaceful intentions but ready for war. All this sounds too familiar. Yet again, the wishes of the main country involved — in this case,— are not being respected.
We should not repeat the same mistakes from 100, 80 or even just eight years ago.has made its move, and so has . It is now up to the West to come together and show that aggression no longer pays.
There is so much more at stake here than just peace in Europe. We need to understand that this is a direct attack on Europe’s collective achievements over the past decades.contributed to these achievements with the Maidan Revolution in 2014. The EU failed them then, so we must not fail again. Otherwise, the hopes for democratic development in the east of the European continent will just be a piece of history, never to return.
*[Fair Observer is a media partner of Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.
For more than 10 years, Fair Observer has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.
In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of noise.
We publish 2,500+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This doesn’t come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost money. Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a sustaining member.