https://archive.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/george-woloshyn-europes-maginot-line-365579.html
Also, even if NATO members can be trusted to fulfill their
commitments to each other, the time it would take to mobilize and coordinate
their forces would place all of Eastern Europe at risk of Russian occupation and entrenchment. (https://archive.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/george-woloshyn-if-you-want-peace-prepare-for-war-367671.html).
(As a side note, I have
found it perplexing that intelligent, pragmatic, and often skeptical European
leaders have such unshakeable faith in a treaty that may require its “Old
Europe” signatories to risk nuclear devastation in defense of one of its
newer members……while ignoring the
tell-tale signs of faithlessness in the clear and present dishonor shown
by the U.S. and Britain in breaching
their guarantee of the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Ukraine. If
these two underwriters of Europe’s nuclear security are fearful of even
providing lethal arms to Ukraine to defend itself against a lethal bully, what
comfort can there be in knowing that they now
“have (Europe’s) back”? Read: https://archive.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/an-open-letter-to-obama-on-the-1994-budapest-memorandum-362977.html )
We are now entering the 10th month of
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It is not
now, and has never been, a “crisis” – it is simply a war. It’s an old-fashioned war not unlike Germany’s
invasion of Poland or the USSR’s invasion of Finland. Having successfully taken
a bite out of remote, tiny Georgia (and encountering little more than western
outrage) Putin decided to replicate his success in Europe’s back yard. It is a
war in which Putin is probing and testing just how far he can push before the
costs and the risks exceed his expectations.
He is careful, deliberate, and determined to stay the course. The stakes
are high, but so is the prize: Ukraine,
the “front line” states of Europe, and hegemony over those parts of the
continent that are not actually occupied.
He doesn’t want to destroy Europe.
He wants merely to reoccupy historical parts of the empire and dominate
the rest. And just as in the two prior world wars, it all begins with bluster,
threats, delimited incursions, and diplomatic prattle, pledges, and “peace in
our time”.
In this 10th month of Europe’s third world
war, the view from the Kremlin is an upbeat one. Yes, it’s true that the
information war has not been as successful as expected….and, yes, the Ukrainians have
put up a much stiffer resistance than had been anticipated. But as regards Europe, the U.S. and
NATO…..all has gone as well as could be expected …perhaps even better than
planned. The “sanctions” that were
imposed after lengthy deliberations were troubling but far from crippling. As Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron has noted, on a scale of 1 to 10, they had
merely managed a 2- 3, and some would even like to water these down. Like good
choir boys, their leaders – each, in turn – marches up to the podium to
reassure Russia of their peaceful intent by denying Ukrainians the means to
defend themselves. And, despite the harsh verbiage and threats of further
sanctions, there is very little more that would disturb his slumber. No wonder that Putin, in his most recent
interview, stated that he now has a greater sense of security!
It
may be that “old Europe” is too old and comfortable, and too distant from
Putin’s scope to do more than growl. And it may be that the U.S. Administration
is too dysfunctional to take the lead in confronting Russia. But what about the frontline states – the
states that are most directly at risk?
What prevents them from taking
more decisive action with Ukraine in their common defense? Strong expressions of support and urging NATO
and the EU to do more is wonderful, but – thus far – it has not dented Russia’s
steady build-up and imperial ambitions.
Perhaps (as noted in the two above-referenced articles),
a greater show of solidarity and a more convincing argument directed at Russian President Vladimir Putin
would be the formation of a joint, front-line security command that would
function as a mini-NATO: sharing intelligence and training, acquiring and
exchanging advanced weaponry, establishing combined military formations,
opening medical facilities to each
others’ combat casualties, and even engaging in joint combat and anti-terrorist
operations. If these states were ready
to send military personnel to a remote Iraq in a “Coalition of the Willing”,
how much more compelling is the immediate and real threat of Russia. Having shared a common fate under Moscow’s
oppression, they should not now shirk the burden of defeating their common
enemy.
Putin is neither sentimental nor a fool. He has nothing but
contempt for those he considers weak and timid. Despite his bluster, he is not
in the least bit interested in starting a nuclear war because his frail and
aging nation and even frailer economy cannot sustain and win one. Mutual
assured destruction is not his goal.
Only a firm and tough stance on sanctions and a strong military wall put
up by Ukraine and the front-line states will stop the slide (as in earlier
European wars) into global conflict. Ten
months into World War III is 10 months too long.
Let’s not tempt Putin into continuing along that path.
