The Ukraine and US Security Guarantees

Attack on Drinking Water Supply

Fighting in East Ukraine has dramatically escalated since late last week. Observers of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) have documented 591 violations of the cease-fire agreements, including 535 explosions, in the Donetsk region and 975 other violations, including 860 explosions in the Lugansk region, as was reported, this information pertains to what had happened on Friday.[1] Saturday, there were more exchanges of gun fire and detonations. Two pumping stations in Donetsk – providing drinking water to more than a million inhabitants – were damaged and put out of service, reported the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Moscow and the “People’s Republics” of Donetsk and Lugansk assume a planned offensive by the Ukrainian military; Kiev denies this. Donetsk and Lugansk have begun evacuating the civilian population and mobilizing the defenders. More than 40,000 residents are said to have been brought to safety in reception camps in Russia. “We are very worried about the development in East Ukraine,” the head of the ICRC delegation in Ukraine was quoted to have said. Western allegations of Moscow planning to carry out a false flag operation in East Ukraine, to subsequently send its troops across the border, have not materialized.

“Imminent”

Yet, the US and UK governments continue to allege that a Russian invasion of Ukraine is “imminent.” US President Joe Biden, who had previously predicted that the invasion would take place on February 16, (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[2]) has again alleged that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin “has made the decision” to launch an invasion of Ukraine.[3] He expects an invasion “in the coming days.“ Britain’s Foreign Minister Liz Truss believed that an invasion was possible “as early as next week,” thereby, however, contradicting her Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who already predicted on February 10, that “the most dangerous moment” would be in “the next couple of days.” However, yesterday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced that it looks to him like Russia is "on the brink" of invading Ukraine.[4] Last weekend, under the impression created by these warnings, Germany’s foreign ministry called on all Germans currently in Ukraine, to immediately leave the country. Lufthansa Airlines announced that all flights to Kiev and Odessa are temporarily cancelled. Meanwhile, Russia and Belarus have announced that they were prolonging their large-scale maneuver, scheduled to have ended yesterday, Sunday. It remains unclear, whether the West’s announcements of an “imminent” Russian invasion is now also entering the next round.

Interests in an Invasion

Late last week, one of the experts, who had responded to the incessantly repeated US allegations of an “imminent” Russian invasion of Ukraine was Nina Khruschcheva, a Professor of International Affairs at the renowned New School in New York. Khruschcheva considers that President Putin is “not planning an attack,” although “in such a charged situation” even “one small mishap” is enough to trigger a war.[5] “The USA,” the professor says, “has a much greater interest than Putin in an invasion,” the US is doing “everything to lure him into making a mistake,” so that “he actually does invade Ukraine.” Khruschcheva reasons that, in light of the disastrous consequences an invasion would entail: Washington is speculating on the Russian president becoming so “contested” within his own country, “that the Russians would overthrow him.” At the same time, the Biden administration is seeking “to unite Europe behind the USA.” However, to do this, the USA “must get Putin to, at least, stick his toe onto Ukrainian territory” explains Khruschcheva, a declared opponent of the Russian president: “If that happens, everyone will unite behind Washington.” Of course, the one who will bear the brunt of the suffering will be Ukraine.

Two Pillars in the Future

Like Khruschcheva, Dmitri Trenin, head of the Carnegie Moscow Center, confirmed late last week “that most serious Russian analysts” do not think that Moscow would launch “a major offensive against Ukraine.”[6] Trenin predicts that the crisis will certainly continue, and “the information war” will carry on unabated, however negotiations on the issues will continue, wherein it appears that Moscow has already been able to make progress. The Unites States, for example, seems to be willing to negotiate on the question of a ban of medium-range missiles in Europe. When Putin made a similar proposal in 2019, Washington ignored him. Trenin, of course, admits that the reason for Washington’s sudden readiness to negotiate can probably be much less attributed to the current crisis, than to the fact that Russia’s new hypersonic missiles could counterbalance any deployments of American INF systems in Europe. These talks could be “an important first step towards reforming the European security architecture” – “from its current US-dominated, NATO-heavy model to a structure supported by two pillars, one western and one Russian.”

“Other paths”

The most serious takeaway from the crisis, explains Trenin, concerns not Russia, directly, but Ukraine. Neither the US nor NATO will defend Ukraine in case of a major attack with boots on the ground. It has been reiterated by US President Joe Biden, as well as by several functionaries of NATO countries on various occasions. This means that Ukraine will never be admitted to NATO for as long as Russia would regard this as a casus belli, notes Trenin. Therefore, Kiev will have to look for other ways of managing its security.”[7] In this context, the head of the Carnegie Moscow Center slates the suggestion, that Ukraine could perhaps drop its bid to join NATO, floated by Ukrainian ambassador to Great Britain, Vadym Prystajko as a possible compromise, in terms of Russia’s demand that NATO renounce on any further eastward expansion.[8] At the same time, the US announcement that Ukraine would not be defended with boots on the ground, has been attentively noted in other parts of the world. Trenin reports, for example, that the Middle East will be watching US and Russian moves in this conflict over Ukraine. It is noticed that US security guarantees ... against a real threat of military collision with the other nuclear superpower” cannot be given.[9] The US withdrawal from Afghanistan had already reinforced doubts about the USA and the West’s reliability.

For more information on this topic: NATO’s Deployment Areas.

[1] Ostukraine: Armee und Separatisten melden erneute Beschüsse – Rotes Kreuz ist „sehr besorgt“. rnd.de 20.02.2022.

[2] See also „Teil einer Strategie“.

[3] Ukraine conflict: Biden says he is convinced Putin has decided to invade. bbc.co.uk 19.02.2022.

[4] Blinken Says Russia Looks ‘On Brink’ Of Ukraine Invasion, Says Biden Ready To Meet ‘At Any Time’. rferl.org 20.02.2022.

[5] Ellen Ivits: Warum die USA mehr Interesse an einer russischen Ukraine-Invasion haben als Putin. stern.de 18.02.2022.

[6], [7] Dmitri Trenin: Arms accords between Russia and the west stand a chance despite treat of conflict. ft.com 18.02.2022.

[8] See also Neue Hürden.

[9] Michael Young: What’s on the Table? carnegie-mec.org 18.02.2022.