[ad_1]
The three Baltic states’ foreign ministers met earlier this week to accept Ukraine’s extremist war goals and insist on pursuing Russia’s total defeat.
“Ukraine is not fighting for its own freedom. Ukraine is fighting on our behalf,” FMs from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania told the hawkish think tank Hudson Institute on Monday. Estonian FM Margus Tsakna declared when expressing his views on Nordic security issues.
Officials in the Baltic states also called for continued expansion of NATO (including eventually admitting Ukraine into the alliance) to thwart President Vladimir Putin and the need for “American leadership” in NATO. also claimed.
However, many of these arguments are divorced from the reality on the ground in Ukraine and will only perpetuate the cycle of violence in Eastern Europe.
All Baltic FMs expressed that a complete victory for Ukraine is essential for European peace and NATO security. FM Tsachna’s eight-point plan for Ukraine’s victory includes further sanctions against Russia, the use of frozen Russian assets to rebuild Ukraine, the inclusion of Ukraine in both the EU and NATO, and the protection of Ukraine’s sovereignty. It insists on relying on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s peace plan as the only way to preserve it. and territorial integrity.
Ministers also agreed that a peace plan that does not involve a complete defeat of Russia would only delay an inevitable future invasion from Russia. “A deal would be great for the dictator,” Latvian Foreign Minister Krisjanis Kališ said, noting that the world was actively monitoring the war in Ukraine. In the eyes of the Baltic FM states, only a strategy of hard power “containment” can thwart Vladimir Putin’s imperialist ambitions.
“We’re going to have this Russian problem and challenge for a long time. NATO needs to focus on how to contain them with force for the next 20 years,” Kalish continued. Peace in Europe depends only on the threat of force.
However, there is no prospect that Ukraine will be completely defeated by Russia. Russia’s capture of Avdiivka last month was its biggest territorial advance since its victory at Bakhmut in May 2023, and Kiev has suffered heavy losses. Furthermore, Ukraine is running low on military forces. The Ukrainian military faces an average manpower shortage of 25% across brigades and is unlikely to mobilize the necessary numbers of personnel to match Russia’s manpower advantage. Thousands have fled the country, and draft evasion is rampant across Ukraine.
As a result, Ukraine is on the brink of a demographic catastrophe, putting its future after the war at risk.
Moreover, according to Baltic FM, President Putin is the best salesman for NATO expansion, given that both Finland and Sweden have joined the alliance, ending decades of neutrality. “Russia has erased the concept of a neutral zone. It’s either Europe and NATO or Russia,” Kalish said. Therefore, neutrality is not an option for post-war Ukraine, since neutrality serves as a “green light” for President Putin to invade, as he did in Georgia in 2008.
Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis went so far as to say that “without Ukraine, the European security system would not be complete, safe or secure.” Without hard power deterrence, countries that have remained neutral, such as Georgia and Moldova, will collapse. Next to Putin’s invasion.
Foreign ministers from the Baltic states have mentioned Putin’s imperialist tendencies several times, but downplayed the possibility that NATO expansion fanned the flames of Russian nationalism and expansion. As Dr. Joshua Shifrinson has emphasized, “Russian nationalism and imperialism did not develop in isolation.” Rather, NATO expansion strengthened the belief that Russia’s national interests were at stake and gave Russian nationalists a cause to rally around.
The Baltic FM also argued that there is no alternative to the US leadership. “Without American leadership, I don’t think we will have a happy ending,” Landsbergis asserted. While the Baltic states are doing their part to exceed the 2% spending guideline, the United States must work to protect the “rules-based system” it created after World War II. As FM Kalish puts it, Russia is actively pursuing “a direct challenge to U.S. power and authority.” Thus, the war in Ukraine is not only a regional issue but also a global issue. Moreover, the way of life enjoyed in her NATO countries, including the Baltic states, is also under direct threat.
Despite NATO’s technological and military superiority over Russia, the Baltic FM states believe that President Putin expects the West to be politically unprepared. I am concerned that there may be. Considering that nearly 40% of Russia’s budget is spent on national defense, Russia’s economy is geared toward war. Russia’s regular military is also expanding, indicating Russia refuses to end its war effort and could challenge the NATO alliance. NATO must therefore respond quickly and unite against the Russian threat.
Finally, the Lithuanian FM suggested that NATO member states should exercise restraint when referring to Russian missiles that briefly entered Polish airspace recently. “I’m a proponent of not drawing red lines for ourselves. If we specifically say that we won’t do A, B, and C, we’ll make a list of things that we won’t do, that’s something that Putin doesn’t want to do. It sounds like an invitation to try,” Landsbergis said.
However, adopting an offensive strategy is not the best path for NATO. Expanding our membership base does not ensure participant safety. Finland and Sweden’s entry into NATO ended decades of neutrality and made both countries prosperous democracies. The border between NATO and Russia was also extended by 820 miles. Adding more countries to the alliance, including Ukraine, would be more of a liability than an asset.
Moreover, an aggressive military posture by US-led NATO is unnecessary to satisfy a “containment” strategy against Russia. Despite Russia’s ability to adapt through war, it is still far from achieving its maximalist goal of conquering Ukraine as a vassal state. America’s objectives in Europe have historically been counter-hegemonic. Current realities suggest that no European state can establish itself as a regional hegemon. Therefore, Russia has little hope of defeating her NATO through conventional means.
There are alternative options. The United States and Kiev should pursue a diplomatic path that preserves Ukraine’s sovereignty while avoiding conflict with NATO and Russia. Given Russia’s desire for a “demilitarized zone”, de facto Western acquiescence to Russia’s control of Crimea and Donbas, and a legitimate role to play in the European security order, it is clear that Russia is at the negotiating table. There are still reasons to stick to it. However, Kiev and its allies need to urgently pursue this path, as Ukraine’s influence will inevitably decline over time.
[ad_2]
Source link
