January 21, 2022 10:19 am
Vladimir Putin will be happy with what he has caused: Western countries are unable to remain united and coherent in the face of the crisis triggered by Russia in Ukraine.
It must be said that the situation is not equal: on the one hand there is only one man, the autocrat of a nuclear power who can amass a hundred thousand soldiers and related equipment at the border of one of the neighboring countries and is ready to declare war. Or at least it’s credible enough to make the rest of the world fear conflict.
On the other hand, however, we find an alliance of countries that are not ready for conflict, starting with the United States which has just celebrated the first Christmas without wars of the last twenty years. In between is Ukraine, a piece of the former Soviet empire that Putin does not regard as an independent country and wants to submit to its control, by hook or by crook. This situation on the eastern borders of the European Union generates tensions never seen in the last thirty years, and this explains the screeching of the last few days.
On January 20, Joe Biden intervened to correct the shot after a gaffe the day before. The president of the United States had hinted that if Russia were satisfied with a “small foray” into Ukraine, the fact would not have been too serious. Ukrainian President Volodimyr Zelenskij replied in rhyme: “I would like to remind the great powers that there are no small incursions or small nations, and not even small losses”.
Differences are inevitable, because Putin faces countries that have different histories, interests and political situations
The next day Biden was clearer: “If even a single Russian unit were to enter Ukrainian territory it would be considered an invasion.” A necessary clarification, given that the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken meets his Russian colleague Sergej Lavrov on January 21 in Geneva.
But that’s not the only crunch. Emmanuel Macron caused a sensation after his speech in Strasbourg in which he proposed that Europeans define a “new security architecture for Europe” before presenting it to NATO and later to Russia. Someone thought that it was a new French attempt to weaken NATO and on January 20 the French diplomats had to work to calm the waters.
Divergences are inevitable, because Putin faces countries that have different histories, interests and political situations, even if they share the same strategic vision towards Russian ambitions.
The case of Germany is the most complex, because in Berlin there is a new government that wants to be more uncompromising on principles and against the autocrats but cannot ignore its dependence on Russian gas at a time when the price of energy is skyrocketed.
The German foreign minister, the ecologist Annalena Baerbock, returning from Moscow, warned that in the event of an invasion of Ukraine, Germany will take measures that will cost the country. The thought immediately goes to the Nord stream 2 gas pipeline, on which Angela Merkel never wanted to back down. But on this point the coalition is far from compact.
Beyond the differences, Westerners share the idea that the situation in Ukraine risks defining the world in the coming years: giving in to Putin would change international relations in the long term. This makes the current period extremely dangerous. The stakes are considerable.
(Translation by Andrea Sparacino)