Ukraine war: Russia’s answer to a historic reality

The economic weapon against Russia are like none that the world has seen before

I am convinced that had United States not made the strategic blunders it made during the unipolar moment of the world, today we would not have this Ukrainian crisis on our hands. This crisis has all the potential to turn into another great war — The Third World War. Why I say this is because history tells us that when countries face economic disaster, they become unpredictable and aggressive.

The economic weapon i.e. the western sanctions against Russia are like none that the world has seen before. Germany was sanctioned, and humiliating conditions were imposed on it after World War-I through the Treaty of Versailles. What did it do? It only rejuvenated Hitler and the German nation to fight back and reclaim their lost national prestige and dignity and what resulted was World War-II. Similarly, when the United States initiated a blockade and interfered with Japanese imports and its access to raw materials in 1941, the response came in the shape of Pearl Harbor and the American entry into the World War-II. Is the West sure on how President Putin would respond in the face of these sanctions?

Sanctions are designed to pressurise Russia and generate economic crisis — maybe a massive one. The Western assumption is that given the pressure of these sanctions the current Russian stance on Ukraine will weaken and President Putin will be forced to negotiate. There are two things wrong with this assumption: one, history tells us otherwise as was proved by the reaction to sanctions by both Germany and Japan; two, like Prime Minister Chamberlain of Britain and other European leaders who misread the intentions of Hitler, the world might just once again be misreading the intentions of President Putin.

For last five centuries Europe has been a theatre of war and for hundreds of years Europe has lived with a historical reality that “United Russia poses it a problem”. The Napoleonic wars, the two World Wars and the Cold War were undertaken to undo this reality. The big mistake that the Americans and the Europeans made after the disintegration of the Soviet Union was to assume that the question of United Russia was now permanently settled. They were wrong because not only Russia remained united and independent it also triumphed.

Russia defended itself against Napoleon and Hitler not so much through its military power but through the element of geographical depth. President Putin’s vital concern is to keep Russia United and in doing so buffer zones like Ukraine and Belarus provide Russia with all essential depth. Lack of depth is Russia’s existential weakness and leaves it virtually indefensible and the US and Europe have already exploited that weakness by bringing NATO closer to Russian borders. Moscow that was more than a thousand miles away from the limits of Russian power is now hardly 200 miles away because of NATO encroachment eastwards. Russia cannot physically guard its huge borders as that would necessitate maintaining a huge standing army; and given the existing resources and without the essential depth if attacked on multiple fronts, Russia will struggle to mobilise its army in the given time and space to reach the front lines.

Therefore, what stands out is the fundamental and existential Russian question: where ultimately will Russia’s frontier lie and to what extent will Russia go to push the European interests westwards? Ukraine may have been the only casualty but given the US and European cold response and their persistence with the policy of pushing the European and NATO frontiers eastwards Russia may be forced to shift its posture. So, what options does President Putin have up his sleeves?

President Macron of France seems nervous and is the only European leader who is consistently talking to President Putin and believes in staying engaged. PM Viktor Orban of Hungary has already said that it is not in Hungary’s interest to take sides in the military conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Countries in the Balkan including Bosnia and Serbia have decided to remain neutral. Greece, having condemned the Russian aggression though, may not go beyond accommodating the fleeing Ukrainian refugees as its energy needs hinge on Russian imports. Like many European countries it imports 40% of its natural gas from Russia. Turkey treads cautiously as it is the only NATO country that maintains good relations with both parties of the conflict. President Putin’s strategy will be to split Europe and divide Europe’s opinion; and given Europe’s dependence on gas supply from Russia, Moscow has the leverage to execute this strategy. It all depends on what cost the European countries are ready to pay in wanting a conflict with Russia to linger on.

President Putin can also divide the world’s attention by planning to increase pressure elsewhere in the world. Who knows it could be somewhere in the Middle East as Russia has its influence there. President Putin will not like to invade a NATO member country for NATO to invoke article 5 for a legitimate reason to create a military alliance to collectively fight against it. So invading Poland or Baltic states is out of the question.

What President Putin doesn’t want is Eurasian domination by the US and its NATO allies. To achieve this purpose, he will squeeze the strategic space for outside powers in Russia’s sphere of influence and offer assurances and guarantees of autonomy and security in return for neighbouring countries promised neutrality. Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia have been made to watch the Ukrainian situation and condition after years of Russian attempts to convince the country that Russia had no issue with its sovereignty as long as it didn’t mess up with the historical reality of the East-West division of spheres of influence decided in the Yalta conference of February 1945.

Unlike the US which is surrounded and protected by the Pacific and the Atlantic Oceans, Russia enjoys no such physical anchor or geographic setting and its primary reliance on its protection was its depth and its buffers. These have gradually been taken away. Given its strategic importance, it is improbable that President Putin may ever allow Ukraine to become part of NATO or European Union.

There lies the deadlock in this conflict. President Putin is not likely to move a step backwards and if the US and European countries don’t abide by the historical agreement at Yalta for respecting each other’s sphere of influence, I am afraid there can be miscalculations on both sides and this war may take the form of another horrific grand scale war that the world cannot afford.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 6^th, 2022.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.