Following the illegal annexation of Crimea and the change of borders of a sovereign state, we are certainly facing a change of paradigm in the relations of Russia with the West. This change happened in a year marking the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall – 8 November 1989. Is it a pure coincidence?
Russia driven either by geopolitical or by internal politic concern undermines the order established in the 1990s with the consent of the then Russian leadership. Russia also casts doubt to decisions made by sovereign states and democratically elected governments. Why Russia should have a veto regarding the European and Euro-Atlantic integration of the democracies of central, eastern and south-eastern Europe? Questioning what happened in the last two decades, Moscow puts her own geopolitical interests above the free, democratic choice of the people of central, eastern and south-eastern Europe. In fact, it denies these people the right to democracy and free choice of their own future.
What happened in the European continent following the end of the cold war was a democratization and stabilization process that allowed the reunification of the continent in a peaceful way. It was a pattern that allowed western European countries to cure the traumas of the Second World War and develop democratic institutions that secured peace and stability. It was this values’-based model that allowed Germany’s reintegration to the Western system after the war, and it was this same model that the West chose to secure peace and stability following Germany’s reunification. So, there is nothing new and nothing bad about this choice. The option of westernization/Europeanization offered the countries of Central and Eastern Europe the opportunity to develop and prosper through democracy and integration. Let’s think about the political and economic situation in Poland, in the Czech Republic or in the Baltic countries 25 years ago. And let’s compare it with today’s situation: the Euro-Atlantic and European integration offered to all new members the opportunity to choose their own future without patrons. Who could have denied to countries belonging historically to Europe the right to reintegrate their natural geographic and geopolitical environment?
Russia could have opted for a similar model: to develop democratic institutions and offer the possibility of prosperity to its citizens. Russia also belongs to Europe being a great country with great contribution to European civilization. For whatever reasons, historical, geopolitical, economic, it did not. The post–cold war Russia opted for developing a strong state, not a strong democracy. It is regrettable and a mistake of historic dimensions. As it is the aggressive policy implemented in the so-called ‘near abroad’ after 2008. Russia will not win in the long run. The country is not an empire, the society is weak, the demographic predictions are bad and the economy based on energy resources income only and concentrated power will inevitably weaken as well. Hence, it is a strategic mistake that Russia has not opted for westernization, in her own way, to become an integral part of the community of nations endorsing the same rules.
To the contrary, as demonstrated by the current crisis, Russia opted for breaching the rules-based international order. And Russia, let’s not forget it, is not a rogue state. It is one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. By choosing the way of isolation, it left no options to NATO member states. Collective defence is NATO’s core business, so the Alliance is back to basics. Article 5 is the quintessence of the Atlantic Alliance. In the recent Summit in Wales, allied countries adopted the Readiness Action Plan which provides a coherent and comprehensive package of necessary measures to respond to the changes in the security environment on NATO’s borders and further afield that are of concern to the Allies. The plan will contribute to ensure that NATO remains strong, ready and robust with an enhanced exercise program, and a special focus on hybrid warfare threats.
What next? This is a good question which has no easy answer. Hopefully, Russia’s next target will not be a NATO country because all Allies are tight together and protected by a common security umbrella that would be activated. We do hope and wish that Russia will review this revisionist policy and comply with international law. If the new gap between Russia and the West becomes permanent and deeper, we will enter a phase in international relations that would bring more tension and less cooperation on issues of strategic interest for both Russia and the West. This would not prejudge anything good for the international community, leading to further Russian isolation and to increase in uncertainty. Plans to establish a meta Soviet Union would also deepen the division and dissociate long term Russian and Western interests, not for a better and safer world, for sure.
Is there a way out? There is certainly a way out, should Russia refrain from aggressive actions; withdraw its troops; stop fomenting tension along and across the Ukrainian border. Unfortunately, this has not been the case up to now. Russia started removing troops, but there are many violations of the ceasefire, and many signs that the intention is to turn the crisis into a frozen conflict by introducing a separation line between the rebels and Ukraine. If this is the case, Russian leadership will face the united opposition of all 28 Allies.
Achieving a Europe whole, free and at peace within a strong and safe Euro-Atlantic Community remains the goal of the Alliance. For the moment, Russia has decided to opt out of this vision. But the days of spheres of influence in Europe are long gone. And NATO will continue to defend the principle that every country in Europe should be free to choose its own future.
Program Officer for Partnerships & Cooperative Security, Coordinator for Caucasus & C. Asia, NATO Public Diplomacy Division
[email protected]
Notes
In this article, the author presents strictly personal views that are not binding for the NATO Public Diplomacy Division.