Can Ukraine play MAD with Russia?

By the Editorial Board of VoxUkraine

The stand-off between Russia and the West is increasingly reminiscent of Cold War times. Russia’s annexation of Crimea, giving weapons to separatists in the East of Ukraine, shooting down MH17, and most recently the direct invasion of Ukraine by Russian troops has made Russia an isolated, pariah-like state. In all likelihood, this confrontation is likely to continue for a while—at least until Mr. Putin steps down—so Ukraine should prepare for a long period of tensions with Russia with a significant risk of escalation into an open war. As military assistance from NATO will likely remain limited and the West appears unwilling to inflict any meaningful economic damage on Russia unless and until an EU/NATO country is attacked, Ukraine will have to predominantly face this confrontation alone.

Obviously, the prospect of an open Russo-Ukrainian war is terrifying not only for Ukraine but also for Russia since the death toll is going to be huge. Russia has every tool to stop escalation and normalize the relationship between countries if it wishes to do so. Since Ukraine is a “little brother” in this relationship, its ability to stop the “big brother” from bullying is more limited. However, the experience of the Cold War teaches us that there are a number of policies Ukraine could follow to make the prospect of a war so costly for Russia that it will not invade Ukraine openly and en masse.

A German perspective on the situation in Ukraine

By Raphael Schoenle (Brandeis University, USA)

In the perception of the German public, the recent events in Ukraine have simply been outrageous and shocking. It is all too clear to Germans what is happening: we have seen it before in Europe, in 1938. That time, however, Germany was on the wrong side of history, and the leading aggressor wasn’t called Vladimir Putin.

Following WWII, then, starting with voluntary integration into the European Coal and Steel Community, Germany has tried really hard to make sure an event like WWII will “never happen again.” Ultimately, this has lead to the creation of the European Union and more than 70 years of peace and prosperity.

Avoiding an event like WWII is still a strong, deep motivation of German politics today. Without doubt, it is pre-eminently in the mind of German politicians in the Ukrainian crisis as well, as for example the recent speech of President Gauck in Gdansk or Merkel’s visit to Kyiv prove.

However, Germany has been holding back from playing a more active role in granting support to Ukraine. It does not seem far-fetched to consider a stronger response, for example, imposing a complete embargo towards Russia. That would mean no exports of food, technology or medicine to Russia, no travel for an elite to Europe that has tasted the sweet fruits of consumption, and no easy access to finance on capital markets for Russia and Russian companies. Putin’s cronies would turn against him very quickly. The hope then is that this would quickly stop any current and future aggression. Yet so far, only minor sanctions have been imposed. Why hasn’t Germany taken any stronger steps?

Putin’s Endgame

By Yuriy Gorodnichenko and Gerard Roland (UC Berkeley)

There is every evidence that Russian troops are fighting the Ukrainian army on the Ukrainian soil. This Russian invasion is a further escalation of the war between Ukraine and Russian-sponsored separatists and terrorists in the East of Ukraine. As soon as the Ukrainian forces were about to take over cities in Eastern Ukraine, Mr. Putin raised the stakes and sent Russian military to rescue the separatists from certain defeat. Both sides have experienced heavy losses, but the Russian government denies any involvement. The excuses sound increasingly surreal (e.g., Russian paratroopers got lost). Furthermore, dead Russian soldiers appear to be buried in secret and journalists trying to reveal these losses are harassed, intimidated and severely beaten. Finally, Russia shows no sign of being willing to engage in genuine negotiations to establish peace—all previous attempts turned into farce when Russian calls for peace were followed with more Russian weapon deliveries and casualties.

After the cut-off of gas supplies in 2014, the infamous annexation of Crimea earlier this year, the delivery of weapons (including  tanks, artillery and BUKs that shot down Malaysian airline civil airliner MH17) to separatists, and now an invasion in Eastern Ukraine, one may ask where Mr. Putin is going to stop. We believe that Mr. Putin has been making calculated choices all along the way. His objective in Ukraine is to destabilize the new government that emerged from the Euromaidan movement that toppled Yanukovich. The ultimate motivation for this is to consolidate his own power at home and to prevent a similar democratic revolution in Russia. In each step of the Ukrainian conflict, he has weighed the benefits of each move, from the point of view of this strategic objective, against the costs. The current invasion is motivated by the need to prevent a military defeat of the separatists and to keep the conflict in Eastern Ukraine alive.

Those Trucks Putin Sent To Ukraine With 'Humanitarian Supplies' Were Mostly Empty

By Paul Gregory (Hoover Institution and University of Houston)

What was supposed to be a PR bonanza is ending up as another black eye for Vladimir Putin, the heralded chess master of world politics. Did he really expect the world community to force Ukraine to allow in Russia’s gift of humanitarian assistance, no questions asked? Did he really think that Ukraine would allow his convoy to proceed into a war zone as cameras recorded the celebratory reception by starving and suffering civilians? Did Putin really not understand that national leaders look askance at attempts to cross national borders without permission? That is the International Politics 101 lecture that Putin failed to attend.

Planning for the post-Putin era  

By Stefan Siewert (Germany), Ph.D. 

How the Ukrainian crisis might look like in five years? We look at performance and identify most-probable growth trajectories for the EU, Russia and the Ukraine, analyze drivers, the internal logic of change and the influence of global trends when good or bad political decision-making by the involved parties disappears.  

Times Report Casts Shame on Obama's Handling of Ukraine Crisis

By Paul Gregory (Hoover Institution and University of Houston)

To the surprise of many, but not to those who understand him, Vladimir Putin has upped his aggression against Ukraine in the wake of the shooting down of MH17 by his separatist allies. (For a definitive account of separatist guilt, see AP What Happened: The Day Flight 17 Was Downed.) The Russian military is now routinely shelling Ukrainian positions from across the border, hoping to elicit a response so they can claim a Ukrainian attack. Russia’s drones are targeting troop positions. Even more sophisticated missiles are flooding across the border, ignoring the lesson of the Malaysian jet tragedy. Russian MIGs are shooting down antiquated Ukrainian SU fighter aircraft, depriving Ukraine of control of its own skies. (After shooting down MH17, a rebel commander called east Ukraine air space “our skies.”) Putin’s propaganda war continues unabated, spinning fantastic conspiracy theories and accusing Ukraine of war crimes as they fight back against professional Russian mercenaries. Russian state television informs its viewers that the true enemies are the United States and NATO. Ukraine is just a lackey carrying out orders from above.

Responsibility for MH17 tragedy: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

 

by Kateryna Dronova (Berkeley, CA)

On July 17, 2014 Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur was shot down with a (reportedly) BUK surface-to-air missile system in the conflict zone of the ongoing Donbass insurgency, killing 298 people on board. This is the world's deadliest aviation incident since 9/11. Immediately after the information supplemented with gruesome photos from the crime scene reached the media, politicians got engaged in the intricate game of finger pointing and making mutual accusations. Apart from major political players we have three figures facing each other with triggered guns and blaming each other: Ukraine, Russia and Donbass People's Militia. The tension within this triangle reminds of the famous movie scene. The key question are: who is actually responsible for this tragedy and who will be held responsible for the crime committed? Let’s have a look at each party’s legal position in our attempt to answer these questions.