The Ukrainian intervention of Russia is the biggest security concern that happened in Europe since the Cold War era. The primary development which is led to the escalation of the Russian aggression is the reproaching of Europe by Ukraine. This situation was harming the Russian ties, Russian diasporas, the image of super-power, and its interest such as energy and trade. With related to this, the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin has stated the following:[1]
“For Russia, the ongoing militarization of Ukraine by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States (USA) or the presence of Western troops on its territory and Ukraine’s membership in NATO is unacceptable. Such steps are red lines that should not be crossed for our national interests.”
Addressing the West about Russia’s “red lines” in his annual address to the nation, Putin clearly expressed that if these are crossed, there will be an “asymmetrical, fast and harsh” reaction.
As it is known, Ukraine’s former President Viktor Yanukovych, acting under the guidance of Russia at the end of 2013, has shelved Ukraine’s economic cooperation with the European Union (EU). The pressure for Ukraine to become a member of economic unions that have not yet been established brought Yanukovych against the public. As a result, Yanukovych began to be called a “traitor” and “incompetent” in the eyes of the public. Protests which are known as “Maidan Incidents” took place across Ukraine upon the said developments. Putin, on the other side, has been taken the opportunity to order the annexation of Crimea and then tried to legitimize this under the name of “Operation to Rescue Crimea”.
In his speech in March 2014, Putin has warned that the steps of US diplomats to include Ukraine in the alliance before the NATO Summit in 2008 “will be a hostile act against Russia”. However, after the recent events, Putin said, “Our Western partners and Ukraine have crossed the line.” He declared his goal of restoring Russia to the status of great power in Eurasia.[2]
Europe is facing an increasing threat as Russia builds more and more troops on its border with Ukraine. The deep divergences between European countries, and, within the countries themselves also constitute an impediment for the formation of a unified West. NATO and EU officials have repeatedly stated that they will impose heavy sanctions on Russia in case of an attack on Ukraine. Despite these statements, no consensus has yet been reached on the best way to deter Russia.
Germany, France, and England, which are the three strongest countries in Europe in terms of economy, military, and population, follow different paths in their domestic and foreign policies regarding Ukraine. Other EU member states are on different sides according to their geographical proximity to Russia, historical origins, economic cooperation, and energy dependency. One of the vivid examples of these differences is that British Air Force planes followed a flight route around Germany over the North Sea and Denmark while delivering anti-tank weapons to Ukraine. The fact that Germany did not allow Estonia to deliver German-origin howitzers to Ukraine later showed that there was a division in Europe in terms of whether to supply weapons to Ukraine or not. Moreover, Germany has long resisted the USA’s inclusion of the Nord Stream 2 Natural Gas Pipeline in the sanctions to be imposed on Russia.
In response to Germany’s mentioned stance, Tobias Ellwood, Chairman of the British Defense Committee, has expressed his dissatisfaction with the fact that planes had to circumnavigate Germany for the armament of Ukraine. He further has stated that they did not formally request more flights in order to avoid conflict and not embarrass Germany and that there was no coordinated NATO effort to assist Ukraine.[3]
France, within the framework of the “Charles de Gaulle idea” that continues in the country, intends to keep NATO in the background and create a security mechanism under the leadership of the EU. In this framework, the Paris administration has benefitted from the Ukraine Crisis as an opportunity. In his speech at the European Parliament, French President Emmanuel Macron has emphasized that the EU should follow a separate path in its efforts to reduce tensions between parties, from NATO and the USA and that it is significant to begin a dialogue with Russia.
Speaking before his visit to Moscow, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said, “I think one of Russia’s long-standing goals is to cause strife among us, and we will not allow it.[4] Despite this statement by Blinken, the different interests of Europe bring the mentioned countries against the USA. The Baltic states are seeking a strong reaction led by the USA. However, the dependence on Russian gas in the rest of Europe is around 40%. All these factors make it troublesome to adopt a stronger approach in Europe. While the contraction in the energy supply causes the prices to increase; this aggrandizes the possibility of harming the voters.
Russia is pushing the limits, patience, and political solidarity of the opponent by using the war method called “Hybrid War” with the moves it makes. With all its activities, Russia is aspiring to weaken NATO’s political solidarity and deepen the split in opinions. The timing of Putin’s challenge is quite remarkable. The “Partygate” scandal was triggered by the revelation that Prime Minister Boris Johnson gave a party in violation of the epidemic restrictions in the UK, France’s election, and the establishment of a new government in Germany after 16 years of leadership by Angela Merkel, all these create serious crises within the Western Alliance This situation strengthens the positions of both the USA and Russia in Europe.
With the start of the war, not only for Ukraine; at the same time, all Europe was faced with a shocking reality regarding their security architecture. Thus, Italy’s desire to sell luxury goods and Germany’s desire to maintain easy access to Russian natural gas came to an end. At the extraordinary meeting in the Parliament, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz made statements that would turn the country’s foreign policy 180 degrees after the Cold War. By increasing Germany’s military spending to protect its freedom and democracy, Scholz stated that they will create a special fund of 100 billion euros to rapidly develop the Armed Forces and that they will adhere to NATO’s spending target in the future. In addition, Scholz expressed that they will cease the Nord Stream 2 Natural Gas Pipeline and build two port terminals on liquefied natural gas (LNG) to diversify the energy sources of Germany.
Before the war started, Germany has argued that deadly weapons should not be delivered to Ukraine, despite the pressure from the EU and NATO. However, after the war started, it made a sudden change of course and has decided to send 1000 anti-tank and 500 Stinger anti-aircraft defense systems in its stocks to support the country. Moreover, weapons-producing countries in Europe often have some legal authority to resell or donate weapons to third parties. Considering that most of the weapons produced in Europe are German suppliers and Franco-German partnership, this has caused Europe to be late in the Ukraine issue compared to NATO and the USA.
As a result of the decisions taken by Germany, it was announced that it would authorize the Netherlands and Ukraine to send 400 rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and it would send 9 howitzers to Estonia. On the other side, the Netherlands has announced that it will send 200 Stinger anti-aircraft defense systems; Belgium, 2000 machine guns and 3,800 tons of fuel; Estonia and Latvia fuel, Javelin armored weapons and medical supplies support; Czech weapons and ammunition; Slovakia has announced that it will send ammunition, diesel, and kerosene.
With the departure of Germany’s senior Chancellor Angela Merkel, Macron sees himself as the only remaining experienced leader in Europe. Beyond preventing war, it also desires to determine Ukraine’s status, returns Europe to diplomacy, and ultimately establish a greater “European sovereignty” and a new security order on the continent. Supporting this idea, Scholz has stated in his last speech that his country will try to build new generation battle tanks and aircraft with its European partners, especially France, and that these projects will be among their priorities. Further, Germany will equip Eurofighter jets with new electronic warfare systems and will procure American F-35 stealth fighter jets in case of a possible nuclear conflict.
After the Cold War, West Germany had around 500,000 soldiers before reuniting with former East Germany. This number was reduced to 180,000 troops over time, and the poor condition of the army’s equipment was at times ridiculed. The Russia-Ukraine War has revealed that it is now a necessity for the EU to be autonomous in the field of defense and security. The issue of securing the northern wing of Europe with England, Canada, Iceland, and Sweden and the southern flank with Turkey started to come into prominence. In addition, the strategic solidarity of the member states within themselves, especially between the north and the south, is now taken more seriously. It is clear, however, that without the United States, Europeans cannot give a coherent response to Russia. The EU’s foreign and security policy requires decisive unanimity. The priorities of the countries are also different from each other. While the southern wing aims to focus on the Mediterranean and migration; Eastern Europe puts Russia first. Moreover, the political and strategic instincts are also divergent. While France is in favor of having military power; It is biased towards a US-dominated NATO. Germany, on the other side, adopts the alliance; however, it refrains from using force for historical reasons. The UK has left the EU completely. While this emerging equation creates a dilemma in Europe; it also makes European domination impossible. However, no assumptions seem to change the significance of this requirement.
In order not to be a pawn in this dangerous game played, Europe will try to make the US’s position clear in the next process and will take the necessary military and diplomatic measures to prevent Russia’s attitude. Finally, the decision of Europe to remove Russia from the foreign exchange transfer system (SWIFT) was published in the EU Official Journal. These steps have contributed to Putin’s blow to the integration of the EU and the collective solution of the problems by highlighting all the issues that the EU ignores. Even though the EU has also implemented important sanctions by acting together, it should not be ignored that Russia has not yet played its last trump card against the sanctions. It is seen that the Kremlin follows a reciprocity-strategy based upon the dose and effect of the sanctions.
[1] Anatoly Antanov, “‘Red Lines’ on Ukraine, Ties with China and More”, Russian Council, https://russiancouncil.ru/en/analytics-and-comments/comments/red-lines-on-ukraine-ties-with-china-and-more/, (Date of Accession: 08.03.2022).
[2] Jonathan Masters, “Ukraine: Conflict at the Crossroads of Europe and Russia”, CFR, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/ukraine-conflict-crossroads-europe-and-russia, (Date of Accession: 08.03.2022).
[3] Liz Sly, “A Divided Europe Confronts Russia with Conflicting Goals on Ukraine”, Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/01/23/europe-divided-ukraine/, (Date of Accession: 08.03.2022).
[4] “Secretary Antony J. Blinken at a Press Availability”, State, https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-press-availability-14/, (Date of Accession: 08.03.2022)
