This is not the first time that the Kremlin has raised the issue of the ‘red lines’ in NATO’s enlargement process. It’s real goal is to begin the restoration of the empire, to reinstate the zone of priority influence in the ‘post-Soviet’ space, and to regain a significant impact on European and global security.
At the same time, Putin wants to avoid any Western influence on the processes in Russia, while keeping his position as an influential player. He believes that this is the best moment for blackmail and raising the stakes and that it may not occur again. Russia’s relative power is going to only diminish further.
The debate on European security makes Moscow in its own eyes ‘equal’ to the United States and partially brings back an era when all the global issues during the Cold War were resolved between the USSR and the United States behind the back of everyone else.
Therefore, the start of this debate on European security is not per se a concession to Putin and Russia, but it is a compromise that will allow them to speak of the commencement of this process as of their victory. Needless to say, Moscow is not going to achieve the desired result. It would mark the end of NATO’s authority in the world, particularly in relation to China.
The publication of the Russian drafts of “the security agreements” with the U.S. is quite predictable. One can take lessons from Putin on how to make demands. He wants to raise the bar of the possible compromise – both an open and a confidential one. The Kremlin demands concessions regarding NATO countries, holding military drills, and deploying weapons there. It is evident that NATO will never agree to that.
This is exactly why additional tension is being created around Ukraine. It means that Putin wants to bull through the “Ukrainian question”- he believes that if the discussion starts, the West will not quit it as Russian troops remain deployed on our borders.
Russia’s reluctance to guarantee its non-aggression against Ukraine, alluding to the fact that such guarantees already exist in the Budapest Memorandum, demonstrates that Russia is never going to keep any promises or guarantees if it is not to Russia’s advantage. Moreover, during all attempts to adhere to the Budapest format, Russia has been accusing Ukraine of non-compliance (!) with the provisions of the memorandum because of the “organization of a coup on the Maidan.”
And if the discussion of the European security issues is going to happen without our participation, it is going to be a discussion about our future without us – or, in other terms, one of the greatest defeats in the modern history of Ukraine.
Instead of mottos and slogans that we all love so much, we should be focusing on ensuring our unconditional participation in the discussion about the future of Europe – if not, we may as well forget not only about the EU and NATO but also about independent politics as such. This is the moment of truth for us, and it concerns our European future.
As for the Kremlin’s ultimatum, the West should respond to it with another ultimatum – to withdraw Russian troops from all the occupied territories. After fulfilling these requirements, a serious conversation with Russia will be possible; before that, the West should be using only one language, and it is the language of restraining. Any other mode of communication is going to weaken the West and will force it to accept the Russian regime as an equal player. Meanwhile, China is going to keep an eye on the dialogue with the West, keep smiling and gain momentum.
Pavlo Klimkin was Ukraine’s Foreign Minister from 2014 to 2019.
