US at Crossroads on Arming Ukraine
Published in La Stampa
(Italy) on 6 February 2015
by Stefano Stefanini (link to original)
(Italy) on 6 February 2015
by Stefano Stefanini (link to original)
Translated from
by Jane Ledlie.
Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
Neither sanctions nor diplomacy are stopping attacks by pro-Russian separatists in Donbass. Due to the price of oil, the Russian economy risks shrinking by up to 5 percent in 2015. The ceasefire of last Sept. 5 has been broken. Reinforcements and supplies from Russia have enabled rebels to renew their efforts. The separatists have added around 500 square kilometers (approximately 193 square miles) to the land they controlled at the time of the Minsk Protocol.
A rational Barack Obama does not hide his disbelief at the Russian president who will not back down when faced with the economic disaster and international isolation toward which his country is heading.
For Europeans, Vladimir Putin's indifference when offered an olive branch is equally baffling; the European plan is based on [Putin's] refusal to resolve disputes and [efforts to] reshape borders through violence.
Sooner or later, the Russian president will have to face up to the economy. For the time being, he is managing to shift responsibility for the crisis to aggravation from the West. Putin thinks in terms of power, state and territory, not economy, well-being and peace on [his country's] borders. Perhaps he’s hoping that the price of oil will go up again just as quickly as it has gone down; he hasn't given up hope that sanctions will loosen as a result of divisions within Europe.
In the meantime, behind the increasingly transparent cover of the rebels armed with heavy weapons and surface-to-air missiles, he is maintaining and intensifying pressure on Petro Poroshenko's fragile Ukraine.
Putin has reached the conclusion that confrontation with the West is in Russia's interest. The crisis in Ukraine is a consequence of this antagonism, not the cause. Obama underestimates Putin's influence over the nation and the Russian population's capacity to tighten its belts. The Europeans overestimate the allure of their own model, founded on relinquishing the use of violence. Putin underestimates European and American determination to oppose annexations and territorial expansion.
On the eve of the Munich Security Conference, the Russian offensive has opened up scenarios that go from further separatist expansion to a strategic capture of the land corridor connecting Russia to Crimea. Just as Vice President Joseph Biden said to the press yesterday, what is at stake is nothing less than European security. War has returned to Europe; in using violence to try to shift the border with Ukraine, Moscow is violating "the fundamental grounds of international law after the Second World War."*
The EU has already responded by strengthening the sanction system, which is limited to individual measures or against specific entities. In reserve, the EU has the renewal of sectoral sanctions that expire in July, and it could impose new measures, such as the exclusion of Moscow from the SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) international payment system.
The Americans are also considering the need to arm Ukraine. An influential report by leading think tanks titled "Preserving Ukraine's Independence, Resisting Russian Aggression" recommends the urgent provision of American "defensive" military assistance (lethal defensive arms) totaling $1 million, not to win the war but to "raise the cost" for Russia and push it to accept a diplomatic solution.
And so, Obama finds himself at a crossroads between the unknown and continuity. He can accept the proposal to put the poorly equipped Ukrainian army in a position to resist superior forces and stop the advance on them. However, as of course he is well aware, this would expose the risk of counterescalation from Moscow and growing involvement of the American military (mission creep). This is something this president has always tried to resist. Alternatively, Obama can continue to bank on the sanctions, probably strengthening them. The time it will take for them to have an effect on Moscow may end up being too long for Kiev to withstand, and the Ukrainians cannot be denied the right to defend themselves. Putin, who has certainly shown no qualms in providing abundant "lethal" military assistance to the separatists, would interpret Obama's reluctance to act likewise as weak and indecisive.
From Kiev, Secretary of State John Kerry has sent a very clear message to Moscow: "We cannot close our eyes” to Russian fighters in Ukraine. Whatever Obama's decision will be on military aid for Kiev, Washington expects complete solidarity from Europe on sanctions. Putin can still step back by simply respecting the Minsk Protocol. He is showing no signs of doing so, and European sanctions against Russia look like they will stay in place for a long time as a result.
*Editor’s Note: Although accurately translated, this quote could not be verified.
**Editor’s Note: The report was prepared by the following think tanks: the Atlantic Council, the Brookings Institution, the Center for a New American Security and the Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs.
A rational Barack Obama does not hide his disbelief at the Russian president who will not back down when faced with the economic disaster and international isolation toward which his country is heading.
For Europeans, Vladimir Putin's indifference when offered an olive branch is equally baffling; the European plan is based on [Putin's] refusal to resolve disputes and [efforts to] reshape borders through violence.
Sooner or later, the Russian president will have to face up to the economy. For the time being, he is managing to shift responsibility for the crisis to aggravation from the West. Putin thinks in terms of power, state and territory, not economy, well-being and peace on [his country's] borders. Perhaps he’s hoping that the price of oil will go up again just as quickly as it has gone down; he hasn't given up hope that sanctions will loosen as a result of divisions within Europe.
In the meantime, behind the increasingly transparent cover of the rebels armed with heavy weapons and surface-to-air missiles, he is maintaining and intensifying pressure on Petro Poroshenko's fragile Ukraine.
Putin has reached the conclusion that confrontation with the West is in Russia's interest. The crisis in Ukraine is a consequence of this antagonism, not the cause. Obama underestimates Putin's influence over the nation and the Russian population's capacity to tighten its belts. The Europeans overestimate the allure of their own model, founded on relinquishing the use of violence. Putin underestimates European and American determination to oppose annexations and territorial expansion.
On the eve of the Munich Security Conference, the Russian offensive has opened up scenarios that go from further separatist expansion to a strategic capture of the land corridor connecting Russia to Crimea. Just as Vice President Joseph Biden said to the press yesterday, what is at stake is nothing less than European security. War has returned to Europe; in using violence to try to shift the border with Ukraine, Moscow is violating "the fundamental grounds of international law after the Second World War."*
The EU has already responded by strengthening the sanction system, which is limited to individual measures or against specific entities. In reserve, the EU has the renewal of sectoral sanctions that expire in July, and it could impose new measures, such as the exclusion of Moscow from the SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) international payment system.
The Americans are also considering the need to arm Ukraine. An influential report by leading think tanks titled "Preserving Ukraine's Independence, Resisting Russian Aggression" recommends the urgent provision of American "defensive" military assistance (lethal defensive arms) totaling $1 million, not to win the war but to "raise the cost" for Russia and push it to accept a diplomatic solution.
And so, Obama finds himself at a crossroads between the unknown and continuity. He can accept the proposal to put the poorly equipped Ukrainian army in a position to resist superior forces and stop the advance on them. However, as of course he is well aware, this would expose the risk of counterescalation from Moscow and growing involvement of the American military (mission creep). This is something this president has always tried to resist. Alternatively, Obama can continue to bank on the sanctions, probably strengthening them. The time it will take for them to have an effect on Moscow may end up being too long for Kiev to withstand, and the Ukrainians cannot be denied the right to defend themselves. Putin, who has certainly shown no qualms in providing abundant "lethal" military assistance to the separatists, would interpret Obama's reluctance to act likewise as weak and indecisive.
From Kiev, Secretary of State John Kerry has sent a very clear message to Moscow: "We cannot close our eyes” to Russian fighters in Ukraine. Whatever Obama's decision will be on military aid for Kiev, Washington expects complete solidarity from Europe on sanctions. Putin can still step back by simply respecting the Minsk Protocol. He is showing no signs of doing so, and European sanctions against Russia look like they will stay in place for a long time as a result.
*Editor’s Note: Although accurately translated, this quote could not be verified.
**Editor’s Note: The report was prepared by the following think tanks: the Atlantic Council, the Brookings Institution, the Center for a New American Security and the Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs.