Filenews 27 March 2022
The meetings between the US President, Joe Biden, and the leaders of the Western Alliance in Brussels on Thursday, made two things remarkably clear:
First, the post-Cold War era ended on 24 February, when Russia illegally invaded Ukraine, and the new strategic imperative for NATO member states is to adapt to the new circumstances of a second Cold War.
Secondly, the leaders of the Alliance, showing great unity and determination, wish to give whatever support they can to Ukraine, which does not threaten to escalate the current conflict into a Third World War.
Thirty years ago, in the month of March, David Rothkopf wrote in the Daily Beast, the governments of the North Atlantic Alliance and the states of the former Soviet Union met to create a new security architecture for the world "after the Cold War."
Western leaders held a series of extraordinary meetings, in which they worked together to develop "a new, lasting order of peace in Europe through dialogue, partnership and cooperation".
In contrast, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg opened the Summit in Brussels on Thursday, declaring that the Alliance must now "respond to a new security reality in Europe".
President Biden's National Security Adviser, Jake Sullivan, described as one of the goals of the meeting the preparation of a "long-term plan" for the deployment of NATO forces along the alliance's eastern border.
U.S. officials have told me, Rothkopf points out, that this will also be a central element of the discussions on NATO's "new strategic concept", to be defined at the alliance's next Summit, scheduled to take place in Madrid in June.
It was also announced that Stoltenberg would remain in the post of NATO secretary general for an additional year in order to help the Alliance manage the current crisis.
The extraordinary meetings held this week were also intended to determine how the Alliance could provide additional support to Ukraine.
Joe Biden said the U.S. would do so by providing additional military assistance. In a written statement, the US president said: "We are committed to sending additional equipment, including air defence systems, to help Ukraine."
The last point, on air defence, was a sore point in NATO's otherwise strong support for Ukraine – a fact that was made clear during a live videotaped speech by Ukraine's President, Volodymyr Zelensky, to Western leaders.
During his statements, Zelensky made an impassioned appeal for at least a small portion of western resources to help his country's so far remarkable efforts to defend itself. He asked for just "1% of all your planes, 1% of all your tanks", as well as anti-aircraft and unpopular weapons.
Washington also announced its intention to provide a billion dollars in aid to Europe to relieve refugees, as well as its commitment to accept up to 100,000 Ukrainian refugees into the United States, to help alleviate the growing humanitarian crisis.
It is worth noting that Zelensky's earlier calls for a no-fly zone imposed by NATO have not been repeated.
Apparently, the Ukrainian president is reluctantly beginning to come to terms with the fact that, while NATO is committed to supporting Ukraine, he is also committed to providing nothing that could trigger a broader escalation of the war, an escalation that would "push" NATO forces into World War III.
That said, the brussels talks have made it clear that Western leaders are deeply concerned that, even without such an escalation on their part, Vladimir Putin could soon resort to the use of weapons of mass destruction in Ukraine. (And this, since Putin has already been condemned by the U.S. and many of the allies as a "war criminal").
In fact, Zelensky argued that there is further evidence that Putin's "barbarism" knows no bounds, with reports of the use of phosphorus weapons against political targets in his country – which is contrary to International Law.
For their part, Biden and European leaders decided to strengthen defences against weapons of mass destruction along Europe's border with Russia.
They also warned Moscow that any attacks with such weapons, such as a chemical attack, would result in a strong response. (Although U.S. officials have pointed out that such an attack is in the realm of the possible, it remains unclear what the response would be).
Indeed, it seems that the level of response to a Russian escalation is the next "big question" that is emerging, in this attempt to balance Ukraine's urgent needs with the desire to avoid escalation.
The three-pronged approach of the US, Europe and other friendly states was to provide military and humanitarian aid, as well as to increase pressure through sanctions against Russia. But each of these efforts has clear boundaries.
There will be no immediate deployment of NATO forces in Ukraine. There will be no no-fly zone or, as it currently seems, no aircraft deployment. There will be substantial help for the more than 3.5 million Ukrainian refugees, but when it comes to accepting refugees, the "appetite" for this varies from nation to nation.
And as far as sanctions are concerned, while the US has already announced a new package against 400 Russian elites and entities, a recurring message at the Summit was that European nations, such as Germany, are saying that, for the time being, they are not in a position to stop buying Russian oil and gas.
A key point at the summit was finding ways to reduce Europe's dependence on Russian energy. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has set a goal of being able to endure up to two years without the need for Russian resources.
And this is exactly what can be seen as a preparation, not only for a longer-lasting war in Ukraine, but also for the realities of the new era of Cold War II, into which we are entering.
But if Russia uses weapons of mass destruction, the West may well need to change its stance on military support (or energy sanctions) in order to be able to respond forcefully. And this will make the balance between managing the needs of the current war, preparing for a new Cold War and trying to avoid a broader, more dangerous global conflict even more precarious.
While public announcements of support for Ukraine and the Alliance's solidarity dominated the agendas of leaders in Europe this week, they are the behind-the-scenes questions about what could happen if Putin launches a new wave of attacks, which are the most sensitive, which may have the greatest consequences for the people of Ukraine and the world.
In Brussels, President Biden declared that NATO is as "strong and united as ever before". All the evidence shows that this is true. But the evolving situation in Ukraine and the big questions left unanswered at this week's extraordinary summit suggest that NATO is also being tested in ways that have rarely (if ever) been tested.
The most difficult and risk-filled challenges associated with this war, which has now lasted a month, in Ukraine and with the new era in which we have entered, are still ahead of us.
