In the post-Cold War era, a new European order and security system was established. In a short period of time, the Eastern European states that were members of the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War and the Baltic States that were part of the Soviet Union quickly became part of the Western Bloc by becoming members of both the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU). As Russia’s relations with NATO grew, Russia became part of the official Partnership for Peace (PfP) program and moved closer to European values by joining the Council of Europe in 1995.
The positive development of relations with Russia has revived the idea of an EU that is more independent from the United States (US) and capable of making its own strategic decisions, which has been accepted in one wing of the EU since the end of World War II. As such, relations with Russia have progressed rapidly and positively, while the US has become more distant. While the Bosnia and Kosovo crises dealt a significant blow to the idea of a Europe without the US, the Gulf War II further deepened the divergence between the US and the Europeans. The EU, which was firmly established with Maastricht, has gained significant momentum towards strategic autonomy, first with the EU Constitution initiative and then with its successor, the Lisbon Treaty. Developments with the US and Russia have positively changed Europe’s security perception and European states have focused on other issues rather than security and defense. Defense and security took a back seat, and there were even demands to end the US military presence in Europe, especially the US tactical nuclear weapons.
However, despite these positive developments, US-Russia relations have remained tense, especially since the early 2000s. The unilateral withdrawal of the United States from the 1972 ABM Treaty, an important milestone on nuclear weapons and an insurance policy for nuclear proliferation, and the implementation of the National Missile Defense (NMD) project in 2002, just after the September 11 attacks, reopened a deep-seated Cold War between the United States and Russia. This project, which aims to neutralize Russia’s nuclear weapons, its only political and military deterrent compared to the military power of the United States and NATO, has created significant suspicion about Russia’s relations with the West and the West’s goals.
Indeed, the 2008 Bucharest Summit’s decision on Ukraine and Georgia’s membership in NATO was the first step in ending the false spring between the West and Russia. Since the second stage, the annexation of Crimea, the West, which did not react sufficiently to the invasion of Georgia, has brought relations with Russia back to the Cold War era, almost to the “détente period” that began after the Cuban Crisis in 1962. As the US/NATO is once again playing a dominant role in European security, the vision of a “world without nuclear weapons” that had been voiced not so long ago has become a pipe dream. The US and Russia have begun to rapidly modernize their nuclear weapons and missile defense systems, while treaties limiting quantities and deployment have been abrogated one by one. The world welcomed more dangerous and more effective nuclear weapons.
Against such a backdrop, the annexation of Crimea further changed Europe’s understanding of security. In the immediate aftermath of the Cold War, continental Europe, seeking to reduce US influence on the continent while improving relations with Russia, began to question whether Europe could be secure without US nuclear weapons support and deterrence.
On the other hand, after the annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia’s reaction to NATO’s restructuring within the framework of the Readiness Action Plan and redistribution of the cards on security measures was not delayed, and conventional war preparations, especially large-scale unprepared exercises, were significantly increased. The effectiveness of these exercises using modernized or new weapons has raised questions about Russia’s conventional power.
However, Russia’s attempt to invade Ukraine, the successes of the Ukrainian Army supported by the West’s modern weapons, the failure of Russia’s conventional warfare, even though they stated that they had achieved their goals, revealed the claims that Russia is a paper tiger in the conventional sense. The technological and strategic superiority of the West/NATO has been tested in a partial proxy war. We say partial proxy war because Russia was directly involved in the war and it is believed that it is necessary to discuss whether it is correct to define the Russian-Ukrainian War as a proxy war.
In such an environment, Russia, relying on its modern nuclear weapons, began to openly threaten Western states with the use of nuclear weapons, particularly former President and current Deputy Chairman of the National Security Council Medvedev. Western states, especially the United Kingdom and France, were openly threatened, while it was frequently mentioned that Russia’s Military Doctrine envisages Russia’s resort to nuclear weapons in four different situations. Western states, especially the United Kingdom and France, were openly threatened, stating that continued support for Ukraine would trigger both a nuclear war and World War III using nuclear weapons.
Against this backdrop, dangerous signals continue to emanate from European leaders. French President Emmanuel Macron, who is the most opposed to the US having a say in the EU and has reemphasized this, stated that Russia’s defeat in the Ukraine War is vital for Europe’s security and that he raised the issue of sending troops to Ukraine in his meeting with European leaders he met to discuss sending more military aid to Ukraine.[1] At a time when there are frequent reports that the US and Europe are reducing arms and ammunition support to Ukraine, time will tell what kind of support Ukraine will receive from this process that France is trying to lead. However, Macron’s remarks drew reactions from Western states, particularly the United States, and even politicians in France, who expressed their opposition to such a plan.[2]
Reactions from Russia were not delayed. Kremlin Spokesperson Peskov stated that this move carries the risk of direct confrontation,[3] Lavrov, who attended the Antalya Diplomacy Forum, smiled sarcastically and did not even bother to reply.[4] A simultaneous test of an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of carrying nuclear weapons is considered a nuclear threat.[5]
This move by European leaders coincided with a new development. The Parliament of Transnistria, Moldova’s breakaway region, has requested Russian protection in the face of increasing Moldovan pressure.[6] Given Russia’s reasons for intervening in Ukraine and Georgia, it seems quite likely that Russia will open a new front against Western moves. A Russian intervention in Moldova, which is not considering NATO membership but has EU candidate status, would go through the same process as the intervention in Ukraine and Georgia. The Transnistria region, where the majority of the population carries Russian passports, fits into the policy of protecting Russians living abroad. Indeed, before the intervention in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and the Donbass region, Russian passports were distributed to the population of these regions and intervention was carried out under the guise of protecting the population carrying Russian passports.
In light of the threat of nuclear weapons, a new move towards the Trandniester region is likely to make Ukraine partially forgotten. De facto under Russia’s control, The intervention in Transnistria, which only Abkhazia and South Ossetia officially recognize, is expected to add another dimension to the Ukraine War. A new front, a new front on Ukraine’s western border, may be difficult for Russia, but an intervention there under the threat of nuclear weapons would pose a new threat and danger to Europe’s security architecture.
In an environment where a direct intervention against Russia does not seem possible at this stage, where Russia is testing SARMAT and YARS missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons, where Trump, who told NATO leaders that he would encourage Russia to attack if they did not increase defense investment, where the speeches of German generals wiretapped by Russian intelligence have been deciphered to send the message that Europe is being bugged by Russia, and where Russian leaders at all levels are threatening nuclear weapons, it would be a more appropriate strategy for European states to make moves to reduce tensions. Longer term NATO/EU membership of Ukraine and Georgia or guaranteeing their non-alignment by both sides, easing tensions in the Black Sea and building mutual trust, even if it will take a long time, will contribute more to the peace and security of Europe. In this process, Turkey’s policy of balance will set an example for Europe. History has shown that Europe’s policy of playing with fire has always burned the European continent.
[1] “Macron: Rusya’nın Ukrayna’da Yenilmesi Avrupa’nın Güvenliği İçin Hayati Önem Taşıyor”, BBC, https://www.bbc.com/turkce/articles/crg9gkd20x4o, (Date of Access: 08.03.2024).
[2] “NATO Ülkeleri, Macron’un Ukrayna’ya Asker Göndermeyi Gündeme Alma Önerisini Reddetti”, BBC, https://www.bbc.com/turkce/articles/cw8jywg628no, (Date of Access: 08.03.2024).
[3] “Kremlin: Batı, Ukrayna’ya Asker Gönderirse NATO-Rusya Çatışmasının Yaşanması Kaçınılmaz”, AA, https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/kremlin-bati-ukraynaya-asker-gonderirse-nato-rusya-catismasinin-yasanmasi-kacinilmaz/3148995, (Date of Access: 08.03.2024).
[4] “Lavrov, Macron’a Öyle Bir Yanıt Verdi Ki Gazeteciler Şaştı Kaldı”, Yeniçağ Gazetesi, https://www.yenicaggazetesi.com.tr/lavrov-macrona-oyle-bir-yanit-verdi-ki-gazeteciler-sasti-kaldi-770808h.htm, (Date of Access: 08.03.2024).
[5] “Rusya, Nükleer Saldırı Kapasiteli Balistik “Yars” Füzesiyle Deneme Atışı Yaptı”, AA, https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/rusya-nukleer-saldiri-kapasiteli-balistik-yars-fuzesiyle-deneme-atisi-yapti/3152638, (Date of Access: 08.03.2024).
[6] “Ukrayna Savaşı Avrupa’ya Mı Sıçrayacak? Transdinyester Koruma İstedi, Batı Harekete Geçti”, NTV, https://www.ntv.com.tr/dunya/ukrayna-savasi-avrupaya-mi-sicrayacak-transdinyester-koruma-istedi-bati-harekete-gecti,xIuyL2f0okWKhM6q_zf7kQ, (Date of Access: 08.03.2024).
