Article 4: Indivisibility of European Security:
To address Russia’s concerns, the NATO members and Russia agree to a “No War Zone” in the geography including Russia, the NATO members, Ukraine, and other European countries. The parties agree to adopt the “No First Use” principle for nuclear, chemical, biological and conventional weapons. Confidence building measures would include mutual monitoring, planned arms control, removal and destruction of weapons, and annual reduction of defence budgets for all parties.
The draft treaty between the USA and the Russian federation on security guarantees and the draft agreement on measures to ensure the security of Russia and NATO members (17 December 2021) proposed by Russia are agreed by the parties as a foundation for the peace process. Both draft treaties will be discussed and negotiated.
*****
Putin and Russia have for years been demanding an ‘indivisible security’ for Europe. The concept assumes that one state strengthening its security may make another state less secure. This principle of indivisible security was mentioned in the 1975 Helsinki Act, later in the 1990 Charter for a New Europe, and in the Istanbul document 1999 at the OSCE Istanbul summit– all treaties signed by the west and Russia. The Istanbul document signed by Russia’s outgoing president Boris Yeltsin, and America’s outgoing president Bill Clinton is a cheerful document. Reading it inspires hope and optimism about stable peace in Europe. Alas, in a quarter of a century Europe has become a war zone.
*****
Each participating State has an equal right to security…. Each participating State will respect the rights of all others (to join any alliance or remain neutral) in these regards. They will not strengthen their security at the expense of the security of other States.
This is the wording from the above documents that Russia has been pointing fingers at. NATO expanding in Eastern Europe, encircling Russia with military bases in countries such as Bulgaria and Romania, and an open invitation to Russia’s immediate neighbours like Ukraine and Georgia are perceived as a threat for Russia’s security.
If for any reason, we wish to be fair to Putin, he is a rational dictator. His reasoning may be wrong, but he always has one. Between 1999 and 2008, Putin didn’t launch any external attack. As soon as George Bush spontaneously invited Georgia to join NATO, Putin started a war with Georgia and annexed 20% of its territory.
Putin was in power for fifteen years. Ukraine had on-and-off democrats like Yulya Timoschenko and Viktor Yushchenko. Between 2005 and 2010, Russia and Ukraine had a lengthy dispute about Russian gas going to Europe via Ukraine. There was no war.
Only when it became clear Ukraine would sign an association agreement with the EU, the annoyed Putin called for a hasty referendum and grabbed Crimea.
Even after Crimea, Petro Poroshenko ruled for five years. I don't think under Zelensky, Ukraine has suddenly become a democratic country. Timoschenko, Yushchenko and Poroshenko were all more or less democrats, openly pro-EU. In 2017 itself, Ukrainians started travelling visa-free to Western Europe. Putin didn't feel threatened by such freedom for Ukrainians or start bombing Ukraine then.
*****
Meanwhile, The USA has been militarily very active in Europe. It has nuclear bases in Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Turkey. Seven more countries take part in SNOWCAT (support of nuclear operations with conventional air tactics): Czech, Denmark, Greece, Hungary, Norway, Poland and Romania. In plain language, this is an illegal nuclear proliferation.
Before one shouts the word whataboutism, I must clarify that America’s belligerence or illegal proliferation is no justification for Russia’s barbaric invasion of Ukraine. But the fact that Russia is giving NATO (read USA) activities as the reason behind the Ukraine war, opens a door for the USA to do a gesture to end the war.
*****
Putin has opened all his cards. In July 2021, he published a 5,000 word essay claiming Ukraine and Russia to be one. That essay has a planned Ukraine invasion written all over it.
In December 2021, Russia offered two draft treaties. One between the USA and Russia, another between NATO and Russia. They were both dismissed by USA/NATO as unacceptable. Now, when someone with 6,000 nuclear weapons offers you draft peace treaties, diplomacy requires you engage with them, keep talking and negotiating for months, maybe years. Dismissing them was a massive failure of diplomacy. It was also a failure to understand Putin’s psychology.
*****
Whether Putin’s/ Russia’s perceptions about security threats are real is a moot point. It doesn’t matter. What matters is that by USA/NATO offering to get into peace talks with Russia, the war can be brought to a quick end. Possibly a million lives can be saved. Possibly a nuclear war can be averted. At 70, Putin is one of the oldest dictators to launch a war. Hitler and Mussolini were dead before 60. The older a dictator gets, the more dangerous he becomes. Because he has less to lose.
Why play such a dangerous game? Putin is unlikely to accept defeat with his nukes silent. Now, since he is declared a war criminal, he would rather die than surrender. It all points to a disastrous future.
USA/NATO taking an initiative to talk peace with Russia is also sellable as victory to the Russian public. With that victory, Putin is likely to make many concessions on other points.
It is still not too late for the USA/NATO to sit down at the table and discuss indivisible security guarantees for all European nations, including Russia.
*****
Ravi
No comments:
Post a Comment