![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
dreamville-bg.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsThe politicians are sick and tired of the Ukrainian problem. They've spent 2 years in negotiations now, and in Minsk they even signed 2 ceasefire treaties. And none of this has brought peace, or a long-term agreement between Russia and the West. In June the EU states agreed to extend the sanctions until the end of next year. But that doesn't mean the diplomats have ended their negotiations. Just on the contrary, they're entering their decisive phase. Only, this time the initiative is taken by America.
So far the Europeans were negotiating on behalf of the West, but due to the lack of results, their leaders have lost the enthusiasm to continue talking to Putin. As a consequence, Germany which was the country that used to insist for closer relations with Russia, has now given up and has inspired the extension of the sanctions. And France has canceled its delivery of Mistral warships to Russia. And right there, the US got involved. Until that moment, the US had kept their distance somewhat, and wasn't directly involved in the negotiations. But now things are changing.
After Minsk-2 was signed in February, Putin continued his actions in Ukraine, but in a rather apathetic manner. Sure he'd occasionally send threats of a massive invasion, and talk nonsense about reaching Odessa, Kiev and Lviv with his armies - but those were only words. In turn, his aides mentioned a few times they could use nukes in the conflict. Those were even more words. This muscle-flexing didn't bring any serious results, as we might have expected. So a new round of negotiations ensued. But this time those were being conducted in a different setting. It seemed the so-called Normande formula (negotiations between Russia, France and Germany) had failed. And Merkel lost interest.
On the other hand, Putin, probably mainly for the sake of prestige, would rather sign the final agreement with America (the most powerful country), and not with lesser powers like France or Germany, let alone the "artificial creation" Ukraine (as many Russians perceive it). Because here we're not only talking of solving the situation on the Russian-Ukrainian border, but something far more important: setting the new power balance in Eurasia.
Thus, the US-Russian negotiations have been going on for 3 months now. The new stage started in may when John Kerry visited Sochi, where he talked with Putin and Lavrov. In result, it was decided to start a US-Russian dialogue between the deputy foreign ministers, and set a new diplomatic formula that would craft a bilateral agreement (note that two world powers were deciding the fate of a third country without its participation - sounds familiar, eh?) Then in June, the first phone call in a long time between Putin and Obama happened. The details of that conversation remain unknown. But the very fact that these two prefer to keep their talks in secret is showing that this concerns the most important questions, probably including a long-term agreement between Russia and the West.
A number of signs indicate that the negotiations are already at a very advanced stage. First, there was the June agreement on Iran, where both America and Russia participated. From a first sight, it should be a defeat for Russia, because it means the oil and gas prices would probably remain low for the time being. And energy exports used to provide nearly half of the Russian budget until not so long ago. In this situation, Russia's plans for re-armament are under question, as are the planned investments in large infrastructure projects. And now the state budget is threatened as well, and troubles could emerge with the social payments; let alone the deepening recession.
So there really aren't too many options: the US and EU will have to generously reward Russia's support for the Iranian deal - and not with money. It's hardly a coincidence that top US diplomats are now hinting that there'll be no decision for placing permanent NATO bases in Poland for the time being. Now the argument is being used that in 1997 the West had committed to refraining from placing "significant forces" on the territory of the new NATO members. And it's not a coincidence that the US has been pressuring Ukraine lately to fulfill their constitutional obligations regarding the separatist territories in Donbass. As always, it's again all business as usual. The powerful are setting their scores at the expense of the weaker.
It's time to forget the idealistic illusions that justice, fairness and the good are playing any serious role in world politics. It's naive to believe that the Russian-Western negotiations are aiming to punish Russia for what's happening in Ukraine. The truth is, these countries and their leaders are only interested in their own benefit. And no one intends to fight or die for the insignificant shit-hole that is Ukraine.
The West and Russia are doomed to be neighbors, whether they like it or not. Which is why they'll come to terms in the end. Russia will still be selling its oil and gas to Europe. It's their most important strategic market, after all. The big contracts with China remain mostly on paper for now. The Europeans have no intention to quit the Russian energy sources, because they're relatively cheap, safe, and stable. No one in Russia would want to cut the supply to Germany - but the same can't be said about Poland or Ukraine. It's telling that the so called "sanctions" didn't affect oil and gas trade - no one is stupid enough to do such a suicidal thing.
From a geo-economical standpoint, Russia is the power-supplying backyard of the West, which both sides are OK with as of now, because that's the optimum scenario they could both benefit from. The truth is, what the West fears most is a disintegration of Russia. And the concern here is not so much about the Russian army, or their secret services, or even the hypothetical mass chaos. The problem is, the disintegration of Russia would not only bring a surge in the prices of the strategic resources, but also the loss of control over a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons. So the West is trying not to shake Russia up too much. Maybe only a little bit, to make a point.
In turn, Putin wants the West to stop the export of liberal-democratic values to the East, and to halt the NATO and EU expansion in that direction. So he's trying to get a deal that would re-distribute the spheres of influence, which of course involves Ukraine, Central and East Europe, and other strategic regions of Eurasia. And we could expect that these desires of his will be met with understanding among the Western leaders. What the consequences of such an agreement would be for my region, East Europe, is pretty clear. It'll remain a sort of "grey zone", a security buffer between the two power centers of Eurasia. And it'll remain dependent on the Russian energy sources. We'll again be pawns in a game between the big players. And that sounds depressingly familiar, too.
Because the existence of such buffer zones is actually beneficial for both the West and Russia. The fragile balance of power will have to be preserved, because the alternative would be disastrous for both sides. But since the Western leaders are not prone to blindly trusting Russia, they'll be needing a buffer to possibly take Putin's first move, if he decides to do something even crazier out of despair from the deteriorating economic conditions back home. So we'll be witnessing still more of this "hybrid warfare" and "Cold War 2" that we keep hearing about. And we here in East Europe will be the Guinea pigs in this umpteenth experiment. And we'll be preached to by both sides about loyalty, about being civilized and sophisticated, and all that sort of pseudo-moralistic crap. And we'll be gnashing our teeth and nodding in agreement, because we'll have no other choice.
On the other hand, if NATO decides to place "significant presence" in the new eastern members, that would remove the buffer zone status from the region, and that would instantly mean a direct confrontation with the Russians. And no one wants that. Least of all, ourselves. Because again, we'd be the cannon fodder in that "hot war". In other words, the uneven status of the two classes of member states within the alliance is actually ensuring some sort of flexibility for said alliance. We're choosing the lesser of two evils, basically. So, in order to avert a disaster, we'll first have to swallow the strategic defeat that we're certainly going to be served, come the next NATO meeting. We'll have to put up with the second-class status that we'll be handed, for the sake of not being used as the front-line cannon fodder in a hotter version of this standoff.
This new power balance will continue to exist, at least as long as Putin rules in Russia. That's why the new system will be characterized by a low level of institutionalization, while the future of that fragile balance will directly depend on the fate of today's power figure in the Kremlin.
So far the Europeans were negotiating on behalf of the West, but due to the lack of results, their leaders have lost the enthusiasm to continue talking to Putin. As a consequence, Germany which was the country that used to insist for closer relations with Russia, has now given up and has inspired the extension of the sanctions. And France has canceled its delivery of Mistral warships to Russia. And right there, the US got involved. Until that moment, the US had kept their distance somewhat, and wasn't directly involved in the negotiations. But now things are changing.
After Minsk-2 was signed in February, Putin continued his actions in Ukraine, but in a rather apathetic manner. Sure he'd occasionally send threats of a massive invasion, and talk nonsense about reaching Odessa, Kiev and Lviv with his armies - but those were only words. In turn, his aides mentioned a few times they could use nukes in the conflict. Those were even more words. This muscle-flexing didn't bring any serious results, as we might have expected. So a new round of negotiations ensued. But this time those were being conducted in a different setting. It seemed the so-called Normande formula (negotiations between Russia, France and Germany) had failed. And Merkel lost interest.
On the other hand, Putin, probably mainly for the sake of prestige, would rather sign the final agreement with America (the most powerful country), and not with lesser powers like France or Germany, let alone the "artificial creation" Ukraine (as many Russians perceive it). Because here we're not only talking of solving the situation on the Russian-Ukrainian border, but something far more important: setting the new power balance in Eurasia.
Thus, the US-Russian negotiations have been going on for 3 months now. The new stage started in may when John Kerry visited Sochi, where he talked with Putin and Lavrov. In result, it was decided to start a US-Russian dialogue between the deputy foreign ministers, and set a new diplomatic formula that would craft a bilateral agreement (note that two world powers were deciding the fate of a third country without its participation - sounds familiar, eh?) Then in June, the first phone call in a long time between Putin and Obama happened. The details of that conversation remain unknown. But the very fact that these two prefer to keep their talks in secret is showing that this concerns the most important questions, probably including a long-term agreement between Russia and the West.
A number of signs indicate that the negotiations are already at a very advanced stage. First, there was the June agreement on Iran, where both America and Russia participated. From a first sight, it should be a defeat for Russia, because it means the oil and gas prices would probably remain low for the time being. And energy exports used to provide nearly half of the Russian budget until not so long ago. In this situation, Russia's plans for re-armament are under question, as are the planned investments in large infrastructure projects. And now the state budget is threatened as well, and troubles could emerge with the social payments; let alone the deepening recession.
So there really aren't too many options: the US and EU will have to generously reward Russia's support for the Iranian deal - and not with money. It's hardly a coincidence that top US diplomats are now hinting that there'll be no decision for placing permanent NATO bases in Poland for the time being. Now the argument is being used that in 1997 the West had committed to refraining from placing "significant forces" on the territory of the new NATO members. And it's not a coincidence that the US has been pressuring Ukraine lately to fulfill their constitutional obligations regarding the separatist territories in Donbass. As always, it's again all business as usual. The powerful are setting their scores at the expense of the weaker.
It's time to forget the idealistic illusions that justice, fairness and the good are playing any serious role in world politics. It's naive to believe that the Russian-Western negotiations are aiming to punish Russia for what's happening in Ukraine. The truth is, these countries and their leaders are only interested in their own benefit. And no one intends to fight or die for the insignificant shit-hole that is Ukraine.
The West and Russia are doomed to be neighbors, whether they like it or not. Which is why they'll come to terms in the end. Russia will still be selling its oil and gas to Europe. It's their most important strategic market, after all. The big contracts with China remain mostly on paper for now. The Europeans have no intention to quit the Russian energy sources, because they're relatively cheap, safe, and stable. No one in Russia would want to cut the supply to Germany - but the same can't be said about Poland or Ukraine. It's telling that the so called "sanctions" didn't affect oil and gas trade - no one is stupid enough to do such a suicidal thing.
From a geo-economical standpoint, Russia is the power-supplying backyard of the West, which both sides are OK with as of now, because that's the optimum scenario they could both benefit from. The truth is, what the West fears most is a disintegration of Russia. And the concern here is not so much about the Russian army, or their secret services, or even the hypothetical mass chaos. The problem is, the disintegration of Russia would not only bring a surge in the prices of the strategic resources, but also the loss of control over a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons. So the West is trying not to shake Russia up too much. Maybe only a little bit, to make a point.
In turn, Putin wants the West to stop the export of liberal-democratic values to the East, and to halt the NATO and EU expansion in that direction. So he's trying to get a deal that would re-distribute the spheres of influence, which of course involves Ukraine, Central and East Europe, and other strategic regions of Eurasia. And we could expect that these desires of his will be met with understanding among the Western leaders. What the consequences of such an agreement would be for my region, East Europe, is pretty clear. It'll remain a sort of "grey zone", a security buffer between the two power centers of Eurasia. And it'll remain dependent on the Russian energy sources. We'll again be pawns in a game between the big players. And that sounds depressingly familiar, too.
Because the existence of such buffer zones is actually beneficial for both the West and Russia. The fragile balance of power will have to be preserved, because the alternative would be disastrous for both sides. But since the Western leaders are not prone to blindly trusting Russia, they'll be needing a buffer to possibly take Putin's first move, if he decides to do something even crazier out of despair from the deteriorating economic conditions back home. So we'll be witnessing still more of this "hybrid warfare" and "Cold War 2" that we keep hearing about. And we here in East Europe will be the Guinea pigs in this umpteenth experiment. And we'll be preached to by both sides about loyalty, about being civilized and sophisticated, and all that sort of pseudo-moralistic crap. And we'll be gnashing our teeth and nodding in agreement, because we'll have no other choice.
On the other hand, if NATO decides to place "significant presence" in the new eastern members, that would remove the buffer zone status from the region, and that would instantly mean a direct confrontation with the Russians. And no one wants that. Least of all, ourselves. Because again, we'd be the cannon fodder in that "hot war". In other words, the uneven status of the two classes of member states within the alliance is actually ensuring some sort of flexibility for said alliance. We're choosing the lesser of two evils, basically. So, in order to avert a disaster, we'll first have to swallow the strategic defeat that we're certainly going to be served, come the next NATO meeting. We'll have to put up with the second-class status that we'll be handed, for the sake of not being used as the front-line cannon fodder in a hotter version of this standoff.
This new power balance will continue to exist, at least as long as Putin rules in Russia. That's why the new system will be characterized by a low level of institutionalization, while the future of that fragile balance will directly depend on the fate of today's power figure in the Kremlin.
(no subject)
Date: 3/9/15 13:28 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/9/15 16:49 (UTC)As counter-intuitive as that may sound, I'm actually liking the logic behind it.
(no subject)
Date: 3/9/15 18:46 (UTC)