Where the line is drawn matters
I am going to go out on a limb. Broadly speaking, the Ukraine war can end with three outcomes:
- Complete Russian withdrawal from the 2013 borders of Ukraine.
- Partition of Ukraine, with Crimea and perhaps some other slices of the south and east annexed by Russia.
- Russian victory.
Note that these are outcomes. They say nothing about the path, which could include war, political change in Moscow or Kyiv, or negotiations. Outcome 2. looks much more likely today than 1. or 3., but there really is no telling. Let’s assume for current purposes that Russia remains under the control of Putin, or someone with similar territorial ambitions. Let’s also assume that a pro-EU government remains in Kyiv. What are the implications from the American perspective of these possible outcomes?
Complete Russian withdrawal
Complete Russian withdrawal would leave Ukraine still at risk. It would want to join the EU, for which it has already applied, and NATO. The former is a real possibility, provided Ukraine reforms its politics and economy to qualify. But the latter is unlikely. It would require all NATO members to agree. Several will be reluctant.
This circle can be squared, as it has been during wartime. NATO would need to provide security guarantees to Ukraine ensuring the kind of support Ukraine has received since February. This would ideally include not just ammunition and equipment, but also training, intelligence, logistics, funding, and political solidarity. A Ukrainian win will not be cost free.
Partition
The costs will be higher if Ukraine is partitioned. Putin would claim victory. Russia would be an even greater continuing military threat. NATO would need to arm “rump” Ukraine to repel another potential Russian invasion and repress the kind of “hybrid warfare” Moscow would continue to conduct inside Kyiv-controlled territory. NATO would also need to counter Moscow’s intensified hybrid warfare campaigns in member state Hungary or non-member state Moldova.
Partition of Ukraine would also encourage Moscow to expand its support for partition elsewhere, especially the Balkans. There Serbian President Vucic would welcome expanded Russian support for his “Serbian world” efforts, which entail de facto or de jure partition of Kosovo, Montenegro, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Kazakhstan, where there is a large Russian population, might also be at risk.
Russian victory
Russian victory, achieved by either military or political means, would entail the incorporation of all of Ukraine into the Russian sphere of influence. Kyiv would be, like Minsk, subject to Moscow’s suzerainty. It would loyally follow Moscow’s foreign policy directives. Russia would likely garrison troops in Ukraine, which would be mostly disarmed.
Ukraine’s subjagation would put not just Hungary and Moldova at risk from hybrid warfare but also Poland, the Baltics, and other NATO members (possibly Romania and Slovakia) from Russian conventional as well as unconventional attack. Maintaining NATO solidarity would become more difficult as Moscow threatens these newer neighbors while leaving the older NATO members untouched.
Where the line is drawn matters
American diplomacy since the end of the Cold War has aimed for a Europe “whole and free.” That isn’t happening. The Ukraine war is drawing a new line. The question is whether that new line will go through or encompass Ukraine. If it does, NATO will pay a higher price. The cost will be lower, but still substantial, if Ukraine as a whole can complete its Western ambitions.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s Army, October 27
– Xi elevated wolf warriors for foreign policy
-Last week I sent Politico’s analysis of US failing diplomacy. In rebuttal, Dan Drezner offers a different picture.
– I really liked Derek Leebaert’s book on postwar foreign policy, but strongly disagree with his new Politico piece arguing against non-career foreign policy officials. Still, I want you to read it.
– Kevin Drum has a list of Democratic bragging points. Pollster Stan Greenberg says they don’t work this year.
– International Crisis Group calls for tighter congressional oversight of use of force.
– Barton Gellman previews GOP Congress.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Kosovo under pressure needs a strategy
Arbnore Zhushi of Bota Sot asked questions. I replied:
Q: Recently, we have seen frequent visits by people of the most important allies of Kosovo (emissaries and government officials) whose main message was the progress of the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue. How do you see their visits?
A: Kosovo’s friends are trying to encourage progress in the dialogue. That’s their job and I wish them success. It is not clear however that they are producing the kinds of responses in Belgrade that would enable Pristina to reciprocate. Both capitals seem to me unready for compromise.
Q: The US and the EU have asked Kosovo to postpone the deadline for the re-registration of vehicle license plates for a period of 10 months. Prime Minister Kurti said today that the deadline for this is October 31. Do you think that Kurti is wrong with this decision? Should he postpone the deadline?
A: Kurti is exercising Kosovo’s sovereignty. I hope he is prepared to deal with the consequences. I certainly understand his impatience–I’ve even suggested that 10 minutes is too long. But being right works only if the move you make does not create bigger problems.
Q: EU envoy Lajcak mentioned 2024 as the last time Kosovo and Serbia should sign a comprehensive agreement. When do you think an agreement will be reached based on recent developments, when do you think an agreement will be reached?
A: Whenever Pristina and Belgrade decide it is in their interests. They are not there yet. I have no idea whether they will be ready in 2024.
Q: Should Kosovo accept a non-recognition agreement?
A: I can imagine lots of agreements short of recognition that would be advantageous for Kosovo. Even with recognition, there will be a need for many other agreements. I see no reason to wait for recognition to get things done that will improve the lives of citizens in both countries. That was the philosophy behind the “technical” phase of the dialogue. While many of those agreements have not been fully implemented, some did result in real benefits.
An idea: why don’t the US and EU constitute a commission for implementation of dialogue agreements (like the International Civilian Office that supervised implementation of the Ahtisaari plan after independence). With assistance from knowledgeable NGOs in both Kosovo and Serbia as well as the two governments, such a commission could make real progress in implementing the agreements and improving relations between Belgrade and Pristina.
Q: In Kosovo, there is also talk of a possible fall of the Government. Do you think that the Kurti Government can fall under pressure to sign the agreement with Serbia?
A: In a parliamentary system it is always possible for the government to fall. In this instance, that would require a break in the governing coalition, either within Vetevendosje or with the other coalition partners. You know better than I do whether such a break is likely. Those who would like to engineer the fall of the government should remember however that last time they did it Albin returned to parliament strengthened.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 24
– Axios notes there are two quite separate campaigns going on, with few common media events.
– Chicago Council finds encouraging news on US public opinion.
– NYT finds that GOP members who voted against certifying Biden’s election tend to come from districts with sharply decreasing white populations compared with other GOP members.
– NYT has explainer on speech and debate clause.
– WSJ sees deep split between US and Saudi Arabia.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Geopolitics after the Russian aggression
I was unable to travel to Pristina for this FAS Forum conference focused on implications for the Balkans today, but I provided a video and talking points for the occasion.
- It is a pleasure to join you remotely, much as I would have liked to be with you in person. But obligations here have kept me from traveling.
- I’ll make just three points.
Russia will lose
- First, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is a serious blow not only to Ukraine but also to the existing world order. If Putin were to succeed, we would see more efforts of this sort in the future, including in the Balkans.
- The concept of the “Serbian World” is no less dangerous than the “Russian World.”
- Second, the Russians are on the path to a strategic defeat. Even if they were to win the war, or keep some Ukrainian territory, which is unlikely, they would lose the peace, as they haven’t got the resources or even the population required to rebuild Ukraine.
The right track is clear
- Third, those in the Balkans who are building liberal democracies and aiming for NATO and EU membership are on the right track and need to redouble their efforts.
- It would be a serious error to allow yourselves to be side-tracked into any effort that slows accession to the key Western institutions.
- That raises key questions about the Open Balkans initiative. Will it accelerate progress towards EU accession, or is it going to become an indefinite waiting room? Will it contribute to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all its participants, or will it favor the preferences of one?
So is the objective
- If, as I believe, Russia is defeated in Ukraine and forced back at least to its February 23 lines, if not all the way to its 2013 lines, EU enlargement will return as a serious proposition, if only because of Ukraine’s candidacy.
- I know how disappointing the EU’s performance in the Balkans has been. It has unjustifiably blocked even the visa waiver for Kosovo and accession talks for Albania.
- But that is all the more reason why those who want to be in the EU should not miss the political window next time it opens.
- Russia’s defeat in Ukraine will initiate that opportunity.
- It is not too early to begin preparing.
Not only rules but values
- In short, it means adopting European values, not only European rules and regulations.
- This is hard, not easy. Politicians even in democratic settings seek power and resist giving it up. You’ve seen that recently even in the United States.
- But going into opposition is a key role in any democratic system. It is the opposition that helps to ensure transparency and accountability.
- The institutions of the state should belong to no single political party. They need to serve, and hold accountable, whoever comes to power.
- To their credit, both Kosovo has seen peaceful alternation in power. May it ever be thus!
Autocracy will fail
- This is where autocracies like Russia and China fail.
- They mistake the strength of their temporary leaders for the strength of the state.
- That idea is suffering military defeat in Ukraine. Its defeat will open new opportunities in many parts of the world, but especially in the Balkans.
- Fortune favors the well-prepared. I hope you will be ready.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 23
– NYT study finds increased use of “devil terms” in political messaging, far more by GOP.
– Carlos Lozada applies A.O. Hirschman’s analysis of rhetoric to the campaign.
– WSJ says pollsters are still trying to get things right.
– NYT notes words Xi didn’t use as significant.
– Politico says US is losing in Panama.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
RSS - Posts
