The European allies, with a reluctant White House in tow, are moving towards recognizing that Russia can no longer be dislodged from east Ukraine and the conflict must now be frozen even if that means a de facto political separation within the country.
Germany’s Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande have travelled to Russia to meet President Vladimir Putin. This is the first time Merkel, the most powerful European leader who also has longstanding relationships in Russia, has gone personally to Moscow to discuss Ukraine. For his part, Hollande told a press conference before leaving that the goal was to prevent total war inside that country.
Putin insists he does not want to violate Ukraine’s territorial integrity by separating the East and still claims that Russian troops are keeping out of the conflict. To pursue compromise, his officials suggested earlier this week that a United Nations-mandated peacekeeping force should be placed along a ceasefire line separating Ukrainian troops from the rebels, who last year declared independent territories in the east. That would prevent both sides from cheating and essentially freeze the conflict.
If that happens, Kiev’s Petro Poroshenko will lose sovereignty in practice over the east. The White House and US Congress adamantly oppose such an outcome but the Europeans seem resigned to something of this nature.
On paper, the Kiev government would have sovereignty over all Ukrainian territory including the east and the rebel declarations of independence would be rescinded. But it would not have unfettered control over the eastern border with Russia since it would not have full power over local government.
The eastern territories would gain far more autonomy from Kiev than in the past and both sides would have to follow a roadmap over an agreed time period to formalize the arrangements through acts of parliament. The Europeans do not like this at all but are caught between hardliners in Washington and Moscow, and their room for maneuver is narrowing.
It is also not clear whether Putin can impose such an outcome on the rebels because they are without a unified command and seem fragmented and unruly.
The sticks Merkel and Hollande will use in Moscow are threats to allow Washington to supply lethal defensive weapons to Kiev, while sharply increasing financial sanctions against Russia during a meeting of European leaders on Monday.
Putin is sensitive to both those sticks mainly because he does not want to be saddled with the expense of stabilizing east Ukraine after a destructive war that has either destroyed or severely maimed its mining and industrial strengths.
The east was a major industrial contributor to all of Ukraine and a supplier of natural resources and components for Russian weapons. The technological quality of its contributions was low but modernizing it while also paying for health care and pensions is beyond Moscow’s capacity.
Russia’s economy is already stumbling under Western financial sanctions and further European sanctions especially from its main partner Germany will be devastating, when combined with persistently low oil export revenues.
Putin’s own position in Russian politics is still firm and his public approval ratings remain high but another 6-12 months of economic recession, worsened by rising food prices, could start to dangerously rock his boat.
So he is in a hurry to get rid of the east Ukrainian albatross but only if Russia’s national security goals are met. The chief goal is to keep Kiev out of the Western NATO military alliance. He will not object to close cooperation, including some kind of loose economic association with the European Union, because he sees potential economic benefits for Russia.
A Ukraine that is prevented from becoming “an enemy” of Russia by joining NATO but is very friendly with the EU is a plus for Putin, because such a situation could provide many entry points for Russian economic inroads into Ukraine — and through Ukraine into EU markets. That would help to bring more prosperity for Russians and, therefore, boost Putin’s own longevity in power.
Western sanctions against Moscow did bring some results because Putin has softened his anti-EU stance and may deal with Merkel and Hollande in more chastened tones. But the NATO issue is non-negotiable.
Putin also knows that the EU cannot prop up Poroshenko financially for long because he might need $50-$80 billion over the next three years, in addition to the nearly $30 billion rescue packages already arranged by the West. Ukraine’s economy is in ruins and incapable of generating revenues needed to continue hostilities with the rebels, who may encroach more territory.
Both Merkel and Hollande still refuse to even consider supplying lethal defensive weapons to Kiev from Europe because they do not want the slightest semblance of NATO powers ganging up on Putin to protect a country that is not a NATO member.
At this time, Washington seems keen to sidestep European objections to supply weapons to Kiev. The US weapons would be strictly defensive but most useful because they would include specialized radars and targeting systems capable of detecting rebel batteries and taking them out accurately, from great distances without feet on the ground and fewer civilian casualties.
Washington is leaning towards such a decision because the rebels are gaining against Ukrainian forces and may not abide by decisions negotiated in Moscow if they feel like victors.
Almost all Europeans, including Britain, fear that a formal supply of lethal American weapons to Kiev, rather than covert supply as might be happening currently, could bring Russia overtly into the war.
It would allow hardliners in Moscow to argue that the supplies constitute an overt US entry into the war and deserve firm responses, including similarly formal supply of Russian weapons to the rebels and perhaps, soldiers on the ground. Hence, Hollande’s fear of total war inside Ukraine and, thus, irreversible damage to the post-World War II order in Europe.
Politicians in Washington may have fewer compunctions about pushing a Russian leader’s back to the wall but Europeans are very wary about destabilizing their hard fought peace of some 70 years since World War II, achieved after many centuries of war among continental European powers. They seem to be leaning towards freezing the Ukraine conflict within some kind of political roadmap, rather than scoring a clean diplomatic victory against Russia.
graphic via shutterstock.com