The prognosis for some action today on
sanctions is not good. Unfortunately, the EU has repeatedly
demonstrated a pathological aversion to sanctioning Russia for the
chaos and mayhem it has conjured up in Ukraine. Italy was reported
this week to be the main obstacle to tougher sanctions, an honour
previously held by France (which insists that it still going ahead
with the sale of the Mistral helicopter carrier to Russia, which will
likely be deployed in the Black Sea), and Cyprus and Greece continue
to stand by their traditional Orthodox ally and the billions stashed
in Cypriot bank accounts held by wealthy Russians.
Most disappointing, however, was German
Chancellor Angela Merkel’s statement following discussions with
Russian President Vladimir Putin in Rio de Janeiro that Ukraine
should start immediate bilateral negotiations with the terrorists
rampaging through the Donbas.
Just who among the marauding,
fragmented bands of 10,000 Chechen fighters and Russian mercenaries,
Donbas criminals, drug addicts, and other marginals President Petro
Poroshenko speak should with, the Chancellor didn’t say. Clearly
financed and armed to the teeth by Russia with heavy weapons, such as
artillery, grenade launchers and GRAD (Hail) multiple-rocket
launchers, and supported by tanks and armoured personnel carriers
from Russia, these fractious forces expend almost as much effort
fighting amongst themselves as they do battling Ukraine’s army. How
they will find time from shooting up the towns and cities they hold
to meet to talk is anyone’s guess.
And what does President Poroshenko talk
to them about? About living together in peace and harmony in the
Donbas? About surrendering and going home? For this motley crew there
is no way back: the Ukrainians among them will be tried as
terrorists, and many Russian fighters who have tried to return to
their homeland have been killed by Russian border guards; they now
have no choice but to fight, or die.
Therefore, the calls for ‘both sides’
to put down their arms and negotiate are disingenuous and fatuous.
Everyone knows that there is only one person with whom to negotiate
on the ‘other side’ and that is Putin himself. This conflict
could be over in a matter of days if the EU and the US persuaded him
to cut off the flow of funds, tanks, weapons and mercenaries from
Russia and to secure his side of the Ukrainian-Russian border.
Without a robust response from the
West, Putin is not yet ready to deliver peace. His goal is still to
keep Ukraine out of Europe and in his grip. His problem is that,
buoyed by the support of a united country (which will probably be
Putin’s lasting legacy in this conflict), including in the Donbas,
Ukraine’s army has recently scored significant victories against
the terrorists, liberating much of the territory in Dontesk and
Lukhansk oblasts. Tactically, Putin now needs a cessation of
hostilities to at least preserve the positions that the terrorists
currently hold by persuading Europe to force Ukraine to halt its
offensive.
To this end, Russia re-escalated the
conflict in the past few days, staging what Ukrainian authorities say
is a number of provocations to try to justify an outright incursion
into Ukraine. Claiming to be a victim of Ukrainian aggression on
Russian territory, Russia’s Foreign Affairs ministry blamed Ukraine
for the explosion on Sunday of a mortar shell that killed a villager
on its side of the border (responsibility for which Ukraine
vehemently denies, claiming it to be a terrorist provocation); some
Russian legislators immediately called for “targeted” bombing by
Russia inside Ukraine. On cue, on Tuesday Russian planes reportedly
violated Ukraine’s borders and bombed a building in Snizhne near
the Donetsk-Russia cordon. On Monday, Ukraine claimed a Russian
fighter jet or one of Russia’s new rockets shot down a Ukrainian
air force plane from inside Russian territory (based on the fact that
no side on Ukraine’s territory has weaponry that could reach that
height).
Meanwhile, Russian tanks, artillery,
and unidentified professional soldiers (reminiscent of Crimea’s
‘little green men’) on the weekend pored over the
Ukrainian-Russian border, advancing three kilometres inside Ukraine.
Menacingly, Russia has once again amassed what NATO estimates to be
12,000 troops on Ukraine’s border as potential “peacekeepers”.
Putin continues to use the notion of
‘plausible deniability’ to cast the conflict as an internal
Ukrainian problem; Russian arms, organizational and human support are
in Ukraine, but Russia somehow is not – there is no ‘proof’ of
Russian involvement because we can’t officially identify any
Russian soldiers. This charade is specifically directed at the
Europeans, whom Putin assiduously tries to divide over the war in
Ukraine.
EU countries therefore have the choice
of calling a spade a spade in a unified way, as they did with respect
to Crimea, or to play Putin’s game.
EU countries therefore have the choice of calling a spade a spade in a unified way, as they did with respect to Crimea, or to play Putinâs game.
Sadly, it seems some leading EU states
are choosing the latter. With 300,000 and 120,000 workers in Germany
and Italy respectively employed in businesses engaged in Russia, and
with France bent on selling Russia military kit, the imposition of
so-called ‘tier three’ sectoral sanctions seems very unlikely
unless the EU leadership experiences an epiphany today. As the
Economist elegantly pointed out in this week’s edition, the West
has “connived in Mr. Putin’s pretence”, and the EU looks set to
continue to do so.
The leaders that subscribe to this
pretence are only fooling themselves. ‘Ukraine fatigue’ will only
further open existing fissures in the unity of the EU – Great
Britain, Sweden, Poland and the Baltic States, supported by the
United States, have demanded more robust measures to contain Mr.
Putin; they recognise the threat he poses to the values and security
of the Euro-Atlantic alliance as a whole. They seem to understand
that stopping Putin is not an altruistic act for Ukraine’s benefit.
Sanctions are a necessary measure to contain Russia’s imperial
expansionism, which will, sooner or later, affect EU countries –
Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland, which (like Ukraine,
Georgia and Moldova) were also part of the Russian and Soviet
empires.
If the fragile minimalist consensus
over sanctions ultimately humiliates and weakens the EU, maybe it’s
better to drop the pretence of unity altogether. Perhaps the EU could
today agree to proceed with a ‘two speed’ sanctions policy;
European member states unwilling to take effective action against
Russian aggression would give the green light to those countries
that, along with the US, believe that Putin must be stopped now, to
move ahead with more vigorous measures.
Europe’s vacillating position on
sanctions is also a wake-up call to Ukraine. It is hugely ironic that
as voters in some EU member states were overwhelmingly casting
ballots supporting (generally pro-Russian) far-right parties
advocating the union’s break-up, Ukrainians were still burying
those who died on the Maidan, and continue to die in the Donbas, for
the values of freedom and democracy that the EU itself claims to
represent. Many Ukrainians now feel bitterly betrayed that Europe
refuses to help them confront oppression and tyranny.
But, many Ukrainians now subscribe to
the saying, “that which doesn’t kill us makes us stronger.”
Ukrainians now appreciate that to build and maintain a strong army
and healthy society they will have to do it and pay for it by
themselves. In this context, the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement is
no longer just a trade deal – it has become a matter of national
security. Ukraine must use the agreement to become ‘more European
than the Europeans’; to create an open and competitive economy so
attractive to German, French, British, American and Italian investors
that hundreds of thousands of jobs in those countries will become
vested and engaged in maintaining a prosperous Ukraine. This is now a
foreign and domestic policy imperative for Ukraine’s leaders.
To achieve this objective, Ukraine
must, once and for all, stamp out corruption and firmly establish the
rule of law by lustrating its judges and reforming its governing
institutions. Wartime is the ideal context in which to make unpopular
hard decisions and choices, since the country has much to gain and
leaders have very little to lose. So far, disappointingly, there has
been more talk than action from Ukraine’s leaders on this issue.
The underlying message of this messy
conflict for the leaders of Europe, Russia, America, and Ukraine
alike is that Ukrainians are united today, as never before, in a
sense of determination, purpose and historical destiny. But
Ukrainians shouldn’t have to walk alone, fighting what appears to
be the opening salvo of a civilisational clash between Russia and the
West.
If Europe ignores the fervent resolve
of the Ukrainian people to live in freedom and to prosper in a truly
European country, the continent could be embroiled in conflict for
years to come.
Daniel Bilak is an advisor to the
Governor of Donetsk Oblast. The views expressed are his own.
