Prof. Alexander Stubb, who was
formerly the Prime Minister of Finland and is presently a professor of
International Relations in Italy has virtually ruled out any possibility of an
Internationally Mediated Settlement for the present Ukraine Crisis. According
to him, the war in Ukraine will come to an end only when:
1. Russia is
militarily defeated in the conflict
2. Mr Vladmir
Putin is removed from the political leadership of Russia.
Prof. Stubbs's
views are worthy of respect as he earlier acted as a Mediator in the Russian
aggression of Georgia 2008.
According to
him, Russia has now become an Imperialist Power. If the international community
had acted in 2008 with as much vigour as it has in the 2022 Ukrainian Conflict,
the military annexation of Crimea could have been avoided. From the point of
view of a Mediator, the present Ukrainian crisis come under the category of a ‘Realistic
conflict’ between two Sovereign nations. Both Russia and Ukraine will
relentlessly pursue their foreign policy objectives. If they make any
compromise with the other side, it would result in a big loss of face
domestically, thereby permanently preventing their re-election to power. Hence
there is nothing much that the International Mediators can do except waiting
for the crisis to blow over.
3. It
is difficult to believe that during the Third millennium Russia has become an Imperialist
Power. During the 2nd part of the 20th century,
USSR played a very important role in De-colonisation. Even during the colonial
era, Russia/USSR did not have any colonies. In fact, the political leadership
of many African and Asian countries owe a debt of gratitude to USSR and its
successor Russia. But, during the Cold War era, whenever the Soviet Satellite
States tried to liberate themselves from the hegemonistic policies of the USSR,
USSR marched into them: Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland. After the breakup of
the USSR the independent yet erstwhile Satellite states like Hungary, Poland,
Lithuania, and Georgia joined NATO; Even after the breakup of the USSR, its
successor Russia had not given up its territorial ambitions over the erstwhile
constituent and satellite states of USSR. Hence, so long as this desire of USSR
to exercise control over the entire Eastern Europe exists, the conflict in
Eastern Europe will continue to fester without any end in sight. This is a very
bleak, yet realistic picture. Nevertheless, incorrigible optimists will
continue their efforts so long as they do not have a Vested Interest in the end
or continuance of the hostilities. Hence, efforts for an International
Mediation should continue.
4. Assuming
that there is an International Mediation, who will be the actual parties to the
Mediation process?
Actually, on the face of it, it
is a dispute between Russia and Ukraine. Russia commenced its “Special
Military Operations” in Ukraine to achieve the following political, economic,
and military objectives:
A. The legitimisation
of the Russian occupation of Crimea by changing the political leadership in
Ukraine and replacing the present leadership with a more pliable one.
B. Securing
the water availability for Crimea, which was forcibly occupied in 2014 and has
a big Russian Speaking population.
C. Preventing
the other Eastern European nations from joining NATO.
D. Securing
control and establishing a land corridor that would connect the eastern
Ukraine-western Russian border to Crimea because some pockets in the region
have substantial Russian speaking populations.
E. The border
region between Russia and Ukraine has substantial oil and gas reserves for
which Ukraine had already awarded contracts to western European and American
oil companies.
F. On the
other hand, Ukraine never had any serious military objectives to go to war with
Russia because it would be suicidal and foolhardy for Ukraine. In this
conflict, Russia does not face any existential threat. On the other hand,
Special Military Operations by Russia is not only a threat to the political
sovereignty of Ukraine but also to its territorial integrity. Thus, on the face
of it, the only parties to this dispute are Russia and Ukraine. Russia is an
Aggressor. It has committed a serious breach of a Jus Cogens International Law.
Every breach of international duty involves an obligation to pay
reparations.
G. Even after
about 8 months of hostilities, Russia has not been able to achieve any of its
military and political objectives. Ukraine today still exists as an independent
country only because the USA and European nations have supported Ukraine in a
big way. All the members of the EEC have suffered grave economic losses not
only because of the soaring energy prices but also because of the close
Economic ties that EEC members have established with Russia after the breakup
of the Soviet Union and the apparent end to the Cold War. Hence, if there is
going to be an International Meditation, such mediation should necessarily
involve USA and EEC (in short NATO). Thus, even though the dispute is between 2
countries, there are at least 4 parties (Russia, Ukraine, USA, and EEC). Actually,
the interests of the EEC do not necessarily coincide with that of USA (both
NATO members). In fact, the USA benefitted from the conflict in a very big way.
The soaring oil and gas prices have enriched the US energy companies which
remain the biggest producer of petroleum and natural gas. The American Military
Industrial complex has made windfall profits, on the other hand, members of the
EEC must accept serious economic pains because of their principled support of
Ukraine. Hence, even though USA and EEC are members of NATO, they would have
different interests to protect as and when International Mediation is pursued.
Even though the UK is a member of NATO, it is not a member of the EEC. Among
EEC members Germany, France and Hungary wish for a quicker end to the conflict
now that Russia has been prevented from achieving its military objectives and
is asking for peace. One can arguably accuse that the USA may be interested in
prolonging the conflict as it will weaken Russia even more, militarily as well
as Economically. Ukrainians and the rest
of Europe (particularly the UK) believe firmly that this war would end only
when the annexation of Crimea by Russia is reversed. If it is not done Poland,
Lithuania Georgia, and other members of the eastern bloc would face
Ukraine-type Special Military Operations sooner or later. At the beginning of
2022, Germany and France were sympathetic to the Russian objectives. But when
Germany realized that Russia is using the gas supply and the gas prices as a weapon,
it changed its position and is now demanding that Russia end the Crimean
occupation. Thus, the battle lines are clearly drawn. Now that the winter has
begun, the rest of Europe will either shiver or end up paying huge amounts for
winter heating. Already, inflation is at its worst in Europe. Europeans believe
that recession has set in. The only western European beneficiary of this
conflict is Norway. After the war began, it made an additional 125 billion USD
through the sale of oil, gas, and petroleum products. Hence, though the dispute
directly involves 2 countries, namely Russia and Ukraine, at least 4 different
groups of nations must be involved in the Mediation process.
H. With the onset of the cruel European winter,
people expect that there will be a lull in the armed conflict. Ukraine's energy,
(as well as other facilities) and its entire infrastructure are in total
shambles. Russia is facing an acute shortage of armaments and Human Resources
to pursue the war. Hence, Russia will be too happy to save further economic and
military pain if there is an internationally mediated settlement.
I. Actually,
the Chinese position in the conflict is peculiar and sue generic.
It has territorial and border disputes with Russia. It enjoys good economic
relations with Ukraine. In terms of the size of the economy, Russia is a poor
match to the erstwhile USSR. Traditionally the world viewed the Cold War as a
conflict between Communist and Capitalist ideologies. Now that Russia cannot
match the United States in terms of political, economic, and military power,
China has replaced USSR/Russia as the leader of Communist ideology. It is
another matter that neither Russia nor China can be truly considered bastions
of Marxist ideology because both of them pursue market-driven economic policies-to
some extent controlled by Western European venture capitalists or entities
based in capitalist countries. China, like Russia of the late 20th
century, has become an imperial power of the Third millennium; it directly
controls the economy of almost most(if not all)of south-east Asian nations like
Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Burma, Cambodia, Laos and of many African countries
through their Controversial Belt and Road Initiative and Debt
Diplomacy. The energy sanctions against Russia by the rest of the world
have virtually ensured that China gets highly discounted oil and gas from Russia
or Iran. In fact, the conflict has caused big pains to Iran, which in the past
had supplied most of the very cheap oil and gas to China because Iran was
subject to US and western oil embargo. Now the entry of Russian gas/oil into
Chinese market has caused serious difficulties to Iran. Furthermore, China is watching the military
aggression in Ukraine with a lot of interest because if it decides to take over
Taiwan by military means, the Ukrainian conflict presents an interesting case
study from which China can learn valuable political, economic and military
lessons. Even though China is not a direct party to the dispute, it would very
much wish to be involved with International Mediation of the Ukraine crisis if
and when it occurs. But, it would be prudent for the parties to avoid
it. The analysis of the above factual matrix will clearly lead to the
conclusion that Prof. Alexander Stubb was indeed accurate when he identified
the 2 events that would end the Ukraine conflict. Even though an International
Mediator cannot ensure the military defeat of Russia and removal of Mr Vladmir
Putin from Russian leadership, academic discussions should continue, not only
on the composition of possible Mediators but also on the possible solutions to
the conflict. Hence, discussion on the topic should continue. (This is the
second part of my blog on Ukrainian conflict. The third part would focus on the
possible solutions and the economic consequences that the end of the conflict
will bring about.)
Comments
Post a Comment