One More "Seriously Bad Idea": It's All Putins
Fault
By John Pedler
June 20, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" -
Paul Krugman the American Nobel laureate in
Economics tells us (New York Times June 12th) of ‘seriously bad
ideas’ which get repeated ad nauseam in the media, get believed, and
cause immense harm to many economies. In foreign affairs there is
right now a seriously bad idea which floods our media overwhelming
fruitful discussion of the Ukraine crisis. This is the ‘seriously
bad idea’ that it’s “all Putin’s fault”. Expert voices on Russia and
the Ukraine are being drowned out.
We don’t hear what many ‘Western’ experts have long been saying
about how the blame for the Ukraine crisis lies with the EU and the
US as well as with Russia. There are two recent publications which
deserve the attention they have not had. The first is the 10
February report of the House of Lords Committee on Foreign Affairs
chaired by Lord Tugendhat. It declares that ‘Foreign Office [and by
extension the EU’s] shortcomings led to a catastrophic misreading of
the mood in the run-up to the Ukraine crisis’. The second is
Professor Sakwa’s recent monumental work ‘Frontline Ukraine’
evenhandedly distributing blame on the EU, on President Putin, and
on the US.
In the last months noted historians John J. Mearsheimer, Margaret
Macmillan, and Tarik Cyril Amar have faulted US and EU policies
which have ignored Russia’s vital interests. As early as 8 September
last year three former US Ambassadors to Russia/USSR signed a New
York Times Oped headlined 'Give Diplomacy a Chance' - Jack F.
Matlock, Thomas Pickering and James F. Collins.
EU, US, Russia – their true national interests coincide
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov's annual news conference of
21 January and Mr. Gorbachev's grave warning of 29 January should be
seen for what they were – indications that Russia would be prepared
to negotiate over the Ukraine provided its interests are respected.
Russia has a vital interest in the Ukraine, the EU has a very
important interest, the US has no political interest provided the
Ukraine is a benign hyphen joining the EU west and the Russian east
of Europe. It was flouting Russia’s vital national interest in the
Ukraine that led to the present crisis. The call for the Ukraine to
join NATO was the last straw. And Mr. Putin, with his understandable
fear of the US, if defied reaches for his sword; further defied, he
uses it.
It is not only President Obama who is under pressure to end the
present stand off with Russia. President Putin too, is under
pressure. The assassination on 27 February of Russian opposition
leader Boris Nemtsev, who had openly deplored the policies that had
brought civil war to the Ukraine, momentarily revealed the depth of
Russian middle class concern about President Putin’s alienation of
‘the West’. Putin is popular in Russia for standing up, as any
Russian President must, for Russia’s vital interests – not for a
Ukrainian civil war that’s in the interest of no one – particularly
the hapless Ukrainians. So if Putin is made an offer that Russia
“cannot refuse”, he is likely to take it.
Prospects for agreement on the status of the Ukraine
Last year the stage was at last set for serious negotiations about
the shape of a Ukrainian settlement. For the European Union
(Chancellor Merkel and President Hollande) had begun direct talks
about the Ukraine with Russia (President Putin) without the US being
directly involved, yet with the involvement of all the Ukrainian
parties. These ongoing discussions could now have far greater
potential to result in negotiations to end the civil war and
determine the future status of the Ukraine.
There is too, a growing awareness that neither ‘the West’ nor Russia
can afford to make more enemies than they already have. They both
need partners: think climate change, Iran, Syria, and ISIS. And good
EU/Russia relations will largely determine whether a much needed era
of cooperation replaces these times of confrontation. President
Obama was right when he famously remarked that in today’s world you
can’t get much done without Russia.
The shape of an agreement
In an article of mine before the annexation of the Crimea (14 March
2014), I urged that negotiations be opened which would include the
lease of Russia's bases in the Crimea (Russia's No 1 vital interest
in the Ukraine) being renewed in perpetuity as part of a package.
It’s too late for that now, but important Russian concessions over
the governance of the Crimea could still be sought in return for
Russian agreement on the whole package which would include Ukraine
not joining any military alliance.
Given Ukraine's economic plight due to misgovernance and corruption,
any package could include the EU matching Putin's offer (since
withdrawn) of $15bn in aid - the $30bn assessed as the Ukraine's
minimum requirement if topped up sufficiently with an IMF loan. Any
preferential economic treatment for the Ukraine to be granted to
both the EU and Russia; a joint EU/Russia commission for the
Ukraine, based in Kiev, to signal any breach of the agreement and to
coordinate such an EU/Russia "Marshall Plan". Obviously, all this
would need to be fleshed out, but something along these lines would
provide the basis for the future status of the Ukraine. Such a
proposition would likely be received with relief by most Ukrainians
– but they would of course need to have the last word in a properly
conducted referendum.
But both the US and Russia are big ships – and big ships are hard to
turn around particularly when there are those on the bridge who are
out to seize the wheel: ‘unipolar’ neo-conservatives in the US and
KGB ‘silovki’ who came in when Putin arrived on the world stage. It
will be hard for Kerry and Lavrov to keep the ear of their bosses.
If the media, ‘Western’ and Russian, were to become even-handed, it
would do much to help them.
John Pedler, is a former British diplomat much involved with the
USSR during the 'Cold War'. - dipconsult @ hotmail.com
|
Click for
Spanish,
German,
Dutch,
Danish,
French,
translation- Note-
Translation may take a
moment to load.
What's your response?
-
Scroll down to add / read comments
Please
read our
Comment Policy
before posting -
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.
|
| |
|
