US Must Lead in Handling Russia
Published in Svenska Dagbladet
(Sweden) on 6 March 2014
by Erik Brattberg and Magnus Nordenman (link to
original)
The ongoing crisis in Ukraine, without a doubt the most serious international crisis since Sept. 11, 2001, is a litmus test for the Western world. In order to handle Russia, Washington and Europe's capital cities need to be united around a common strategy to support Ukraine and pressure Russia, making it clear that Moscow's actions toward Ukraine don't have a place in modern Europe. Such a united trans-Atlantic strategy needs American leadership — something that has been lacking the past few years.
From the very beginning, the Obama administration has shown a disinterest in getting involved in European affairs. The U.S. has not contributed to the discussion around the euro crisis in the European Union, nor has it, in recent years, further pursued the question of NATO's continued expansion to the east. During the 2011 crisis in Libya, America's role was to "lead from behind," in other words, provide important support, but allow Europe to take the biggest responsibility for military intervention and have the higher political profile in relation to the world around it. Even if this American strategy worked relatively well in the case of Libya, it won't do the same in Ukraine. Libya was a relatively peripheral crisis, while the ongoing crisis in Ukraine goes straight to the core of Europe's current security architecture.
Historically, the U.S. has played a decisive role in European security. During the Cold War, the U.S. was the main architect of Western European security structure and West Germany's incorporation into the European family after World War II. At the same time, the U.S. constituted a safe guarantee against a Soviet invasion. After the Cold War, it was an American-led NATO intervention that brought an end to the conflicts in the Balkans during the 1990s. Both Presidents Clinton and Bush pushed for NATO's expansion into Eastern Europe and were active when it came to convincing Paris and Berlin to support the policy.
That form of American leadership is needed today more than ever. For far too long, the EU and U.S. have ignored the worrying signals that have come from Moscow. While the Obama administration has focused on restoring relations with Russia and trying to work together with Putin in Syria and Iran, the EU has lived in a dream world of security policy. Ukraine should be a wake-up call that the EU's belief that bureaucrats in Brussels can manage foreign political relations without either Washington or NATO — and that "hard security" doesn't need to be taken into account — doesn't work in reality.
The situation in Crimea shows how faulty such a view is, and the dangerous consequences it can give rise to. Russia's strategic logic is on the one hand to expand its power status in Europe's peripherals, and at the same time undermine continued EU expansion and European integration. It's no coincidence that Putin worked as hard as he did to make sure Ukraine didn't sign any trade agreement with the EU. Moscow has long regarded the EU's "eastern partnership" as a big threat to its traditional sphere of interest in Eastern Europe.
The EU must, therefore, be willing to consider expansion. Brussels must give countries like Ukraine and Moldova real hope of future membership. Until the enlargement of the EU is complete, Europe won't become "whole, free and peaceful." American leadership is once again needed to build unity within the EU over this being the right way forward in the long run.
Continued short-term economic support to Ukraine is also needed. The loan package of 11 billion euros that the EU Commission recently offered must be approved quickly by the Ukrainian state. The EU can also show support to Ukraine by sending more key people to Kiev to work as peace supervisors.
Besides support to the Ukrainian regime, the western world must also put pressure on Putin. With few tools available, economic sanctions now seem to be the West's best alternative. But in order for these to be effective, they have to inflict some real pain on Putin. The United States, which has shown itself willing to utilize tough sanctions, now must push for Europe to do the same thing. Most importantly, Washington must put pressure on London and Berlin not to water down potential EU sanctions. Diplomatic attempts to solve the crisis will fail if the western world is unable to put enough pressure on Putin.
The crisis in Ukraine is a wake-up call for Europe. Like so many times before in Europe's modern history, the U.S. needs to actively engage itself in order to manage the ongoing crisis. Most of all, both the U.S. and the EU need to stand behind a strong economic support package to Ukraine and sanctions against Russia. Putin isn't going to give up his influence in Ukraine and its neighbors easily — an influence that in itself is a problem for the European community's future. It's up to the U.S. and EU to make sure he does not get his way.
From the very beginning, the Obama administration has shown a disinterest in getting involved in European affairs. The U.S. has not contributed to the discussion around the euro crisis in the European Union, nor has it, in recent years, further pursued the question of NATO's continued expansion to the east. During the 2011 crisis in Libya, America's role was to "lead from behind," in other words, provide important support, but allow Europe to take the biggest responsibility for military intervention and have the higher political profile in relation to the world around it. Even if this American strategy worked relatively well in the case of Libya, it won't do the same in Ukraine. Libya was a relatively peripheral crisis, while the ongoing crisis in Ukraine goes straight to the core of Europe's current security architecture.
Historically, the U.S. has played a decisive role in European security. During the Cold War, the U.S. was the main architect of Western European security structure and West Germany's incorporation into the European family after World War II. At the same time, the U.S. constituted a safe guarantee against a Soviet invasion. After the Cold War, it was an American-led NATO intervention that brought an end to the conflicts in the Balkans during the 1990s. Both Presidents Clinton and Bush pushed for NATO's expansion into Eastern Europe and were active when it came to convincing Paris and Berlin to support the policy.
That form of American leadership is needed today more than ever. For far too long, the EU and U.S. have ignored the worrying signals that have come from Moscow. While the Obama administration has focused on restoring relations with Russia and trying to work together with Putin in Syria and Iran, the EU has lived in a dream world of security policy. Ukraine should be a wake-up call that the EU's belief that bureaucrats in Brussels can manage foreign political relations without either Washington or NATO — and that "hard security" doesn't need to be taken into account — doesn't work in reality.
The situation in Crimea shows how faulty such a view is, and the dangerous consequences it can give rise to. Russia's strategic logic is on the one hand to expand its power status in Europe's peripherals, and at the same time undermine continued EU expansion and European integration. It's no coincidence that Putin worked as hard as he did to make sure Ukraine didn't sign any trade agreement with the EU. Moscow has long regarded the EU's "eastern partnership" as a big threat to its traditional sphere of interest in Eastern Europe.
The EU must, therefore, be willing to consider expansion. Brussels must give countries like Ukraine and Moldova real hope of future membership. Until the enlargement of the EU is complete, Europe won't become "whole, free and peaceful." American leadership is once again needed to build unity within the EU over this being the right way forward in the long run.
Continued short-term economic support to Ukraine is also needed. The loan package of 11 billion euros that the EU Commission recently offered must be approved quickly by the Ukrainian state. The EU can also show support to Ukraine by sending more key people to Kiev to work as peace supervisors.
Besides support to the Ukrainian regime, the western world must also put pressure on Putin. With few tools available, economic sanctions now seem to be the West's best alternative. But in order for these to be effective, they have to inflict some real pain on Putin. The United States, which has shown itself willing to utilize tough sanctions, now must push for Europe to do the same thing. Most importantly, Washington must put pressure on London and Berlin not to water down potential EU sanctions. Diplomatic attempts to solve the crisis will fail if the western world is unable to put enough pressure on Putin.
The crisis in Ukraine is a wake-up call for Europe. Like so many times before in Europe's modern history, the U.S. needs to actively engage itself in order to manage the ongoing crisis. Most of all, both the U.S. and the EU need to stand behind a strong economic support package to Ukraine and sanctions against Russia. Putin isn't going to give up his influence in Ukraine and its neighbors easily — an influence that in itself is a problem for the European community's future. It's up to the U.S. and EU to make sure he does not get his way.