By Brett Daniel Shehadey
Special Contributor for In Homeland Security
“All for one, one for all.” – NATO’s message to allies.
This message comes after NATO has scrambled jets over 400 times in response to Russian incursions this year alone—a 50 percent increase from last year. NATO is learning something from these aerial maneuvers and observing their tactics–even avoiding near collisions. Russia has provocatively sent bombers all the way out to America’s west coast and Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said they would continue to expand their flight plans and fly along America’s coastline and the Gulf of Mexico.
Traveling to the Baltic States in a campaign of military diplomacy and solidarity, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg reassures NATO’s commitment to collective security and collective defense. A Readiness Action Plan was outlined in Lithuania that includes increased defense spending commitments by that country. A similar pattern of increased defense spending has spread all across Europe in response to Russian military aggression.
NATO is also working closer with the European Union to address common security issues. The EU has its own military components in addition to the military forces of its member states and NATO. There is also no shortage of defense and security organizations in Europe either (e.g., the European Defense Agency or the more than a dozen others). Russia’s hostile neighbor policy is becoming a European Union collective defense multiplier. It already has a combined active duty military of over 1.5 million and spends over 192 billion euros on defense. We may soon see a substantial but reluctant European Union military emerge under direct EU control which might allow them more of a continental approach to security, apart from NATO but in cooperation with it.
Today, U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden, on his visit to Ukraine, warned that if Russia did not get their forces out of Ukraine they would face further isolation and sanctions. This does not apply the use of military force but such forces are scrambling in the background. Pictures of Vice President Biden laughing with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko are meant to show a stronger solidarity between Washington and Kiev in the effort to compel Moscow to withdraw its troops and arms from Luhansk, Donetsk and Novoazovsk.
So far, 4,300 lives are estimated to have been lost and about 1,000 of them since the second ceasefire agreement was enacted last September. Russia has annexed Crimea, stationed more troops there, aided the pro-Russian separatists in growing portions of southeastern Ukraine where their forces are reportedly pouring in through a ground corridor in the farthest south along the Sea of Azov.
Previous U.S. dignitaries traveling to Ukraine, other than the U.S. Vice President have included: the Secretary of State and the Director of the CIA. President Barack Obama has met with President Poroshenko in the White House and in Europe. In addition to that, the NATO Secretary General, the German Chancellor and others.
What is the impact of high profile visits to Ukraine during this conflict? Washington’s envoys serve to embolden Ukraine and continue to diplomatically provoke Moscow. Russia then responds by using more military assistance and military provocation and the West responds with more diplomatic and economic maneuvering. They could not be playing less than two totally different games in the contest for political influence in Ukraine.
The U.S. and Europe have been reluctant to arm the Ukrainians or mobilize forces near their border. NATO has established a rapid reaction unit of 5,000 troops. Washington did give $118 million in non-lethal military aid to Kiev and Vice President Biden did not mention anything more. This included counter-mortar radar systems, body armor, night vision goggles, patrol boats, tents, helmets, etc.
Outside of those efforts above, the Western message, which should be clear to Moscow has repeatedly been, ‘We do not want a military conflict in Ukraine or with you.’
The message from Moscow appears to be, ‘You have already started one. If you do not want war any more, then stop the sanctions and go back to the negotiations table.’
Russia clearly does not distinguish political intrigue and paramilitary instigation. It does not seem to view the military as a separate instrument of last resort, as the West does, even in its 21st century diplomacy. The West is almost ready to put that necessary instrument of force to use, but only as its message of the more benign diplomatic strategy is lost in translation in regards to the Kremlin’s larger ambition.
Comments are closed.