Russia’s military maneuvers with some 150,000 men and thousands of tanks on Crimea’s borders are a reminder that nothing in European politics is straightforward. President Barack Obama’s cautious reaction is understandable and wise.
Lulled by the unprecedented prosperity since World War II, many ordinary people might consider that wars involving European powers are unlikely but tiny Crimea could force a rethink.
Whatever happens to the rest of Ukraine, there is very little chance that Russia’s Vladimir Putin will allow his only major naval base in the south to fall under the sovereignty of a pro-Western regime in Kiev determined to weaken ties with Moscow.
The White House and European leaders are trying to legitimize the ousting of an elected leader from the President’s slot in Kiev but that seems hypocritical to many other leaders outside the West because they fear the power of their own streets.
Ukraine is also a poisoned chalice for the European Union because it needs a minimum $35 billion within two years to stay afloat. Failing that money’s arrival or severe austerities to balance budgets imposed by the West, the nationalist protestors who deposed President Viktor Yanukovych may be unable to face the people’s rage. They could turn against the European Union, resulting in unprecedented chaos in Kiev and west and central Ukraine.
Moscow will not countenance such upheaval at its borders, in a country with which it has long historical and deep economic ties. That would compromise its vital national security interests. If it does not send in tanks, it will incite local proxies.
Masked and armed proxies for Ukraine’s Russian speakers have already seized the Crimean parliament and other official buildings. Many expect that Crimea will announce a break from Kiev in polls slated for May.
To Americans and West Europeans, Crimea may sound like an obscure outpost. But history indicates its strategic importance. The earlier Crimean War (1853-1856) changed the course of European Empires by inflicting defeat on the Russian Czar and forcing a political realignment that brought more power to Britain and France while weakening the Austrians, Russians and Ottoman Turks.
However, the Western gains lasted just 30 years and the underlying wariness among the major players of the time continued to grow.
That distrust created the tinderbox that exploded into World War I, the most horrific carnage known to humankind up to that time. The war was sparked by the impulsive act of an immature, 19-year-old student Gavrilo Prinzip, who wanted to be a Serb nationalist. He fired two revolver shots murdering Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife as they rode in a motorcade in Sarajevo. World War I started a month later, on July 28, 1914.
Prinzip was trying to protest Austrian dominance over his homeland, authorized by an 1878 treaty among European powers including France, Britain and Germany without consulting the locals.
The Crimean War, famed for Britain’s Charge of the Light Brigade, forced the Czar to acquiesce to loss of power and territories. It had much wider impacts because the Czar never recovered prestige. Finally, his continued weakness and autocratic governance encouraged nationalist Russians driven by communism to depose him in 1917, paving the way for the Soviet Union’s creation in 1922.
Now, we live in a different time and a different world but human passions are no more tamed than in earlier periods. And the strategic stakes are higher.
The Crimean peninsula hosts major Russian naval and military installations. It was an autonomous republic given to Ukraine by the Soviet Union in 1954 but had its own parliament and President. In 1995, it agreed to a reduction of autonomy in post-Soviet Ukraine and accepted the President in Kiev as its own president because Crimeans expected more prosperity and democracy.
Neither happened because of corruption, incompetence and rivalries in Kiev. Now, many Crimeans are fed up of nearly two decades of the turbulence in Kiev’s politics. They are ripe for a change. In any case, most see themselves as rooted in Russian culture for over 200 years.
Crimea’s original inhabitants, the Muslim Tartars may loathe Moscow but they are just 12% of the population. Joseph Stalin’s Soviet regime deported millions to distant parts because he feared rebellion. Some could turn to Islamic radicalism if their interests are neglected this time.
The best outcome may be a Crimea that expands autonomy and local democracy for the sake of all its inhabitants within a federated structure in Ukraine. That would also allow its Russian language majority to enjoy Russian culture without being pushed into Moscow’s service by Ukrainian nationalists in Kiev.