What Will NATO Do?

This piece by Andrew A. Michta at 1945 on potential NATO responses to a Russian invasion of Ukraine illustrates neatly a point I have been making for some time:

Amidst continued speculation as to whether Russian President Vladimir Putin will unleash yet another attack against Ukraine, the focus has been on the likelihood of a kinetic conflict in Europe along NATO’s Eastern Flank. Still, judging by the scope of the demands presented by Russia in the two so-called “draft treaties” with NATO and the United States, respectively, Moscow must have no illusions that these would be accepted, for they would remake Euro-Atlantic security, creating conditions that would undermine NATO and America’s ability to work with its allies. Putin may have already decided to move militarily, and calls for the West to negotiate could create a “maskirovka” and in doing so provide a casus belli for Moscow, which would try to claim that Washington had refused to consider its terms.

Mr. Michta is a Pole, born in Poland. As such he has interests in the situation that go beyond American interests. I’m not saying his advice should be rejected out-of-hand. Just that we need to take his advice with a grain of salt. Why does everybody involved with crafting our policy with respect to Russia and Ukraine seem to be a Pole or a Ukrainian?

At any rate he offers what I think is a fantastical scenario:

It is critical to consider what might happen should Russia invade Ukraine, and what might happen if we do not start thinking long-term about the impact of this crisis. A second Russian attack on Ukraine, should it happen, ought to serve as a long-overdue wake-up call for the West about Russia’s intentions to establish an exclusive sphere of influence in Eastern Europe and assert Moscow’s claims to exercising influence in Central Europe, within NATO’s perimeter. Assuming the West finally recognizes the immediacy of the threat, the best ancillary outcome would be the rearmament of European NATO allies and an increase in U.S. military presence along the Eastern Flank, including permanent U.S. bases in Poland and Romania. Next, Europeans would need to spend money, not only on developing real, exercised military capabilities, but also on shoring up the infrastructure across the Continent, especially North-South, to ensure that military mobility requirements are met, and to demonstrate this through a series of exercises. Most importantly, the European NATO allies and partners would need to show that they are capable of reaching consensus to respond with meaningful sanctions, beginning with cutting Russian banks off from SWIFT and stopping Nord Stream 2, as well as showing resolve to respond with force should Putin try to use military threats against the alliance. Last but not least, if Ukraine decides to fight back the West should support its resistance against this new Russian assault on its national sovereignty.

before at arriving at what appears to me to be the most likely outcome:

The worst-case scenario would be yet another round of verbal condemnations and toothless sanctions, which would serve to strengthen Putin’s belief that Europe lacks the will to match his challenge. Should the response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine be more of the same, Europe’s security would deteriorate dramatically. The zone of competition would shift from Eastern Europe to Central Europe and the Baltic states, where the next round of Putin’s demands could be a de facto “Finlandization” of the Baltic States and pressure on the United States and NATO to remove military assets from the intermarium between the Baltic and the Black Seas, especially from Poland and Romania. In this scenario Putin would target Germany as his “partner of preference,” with the expectation that by applying its energy weapon Moscow could eventually coax Berlin into a “neo-Bismarckian” accommodation that would in effect divide Europe into two spheres of influence, rendering the United States increasingly irrelevant to the overall strategic balance in Europe.

In my view our actual interests in Ukraine are quite limited. They are, in John Quincy Adams’s words, as the “well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all” but, continuing with that quote, we should be the “champion and vindicator only of our own”. In that regard we might do well to take our cue from Germany. As long as Germany is content with what’s happening in Eastern Europe, cozying up to Russia, and not preparing for armed conflict, why should we do otherwise?

1 comment… add one
  • bob sykes Link

    Michta, of course, is the real problem, him and his lunatic allies.

    Russia is not the problem. Originally it wasn’t even the problem in Ukraine. The US attacked the Ukraine, organizing a coup d’etat that overthrew Ukraine’s legitimate democratically elected President, and replacing him with a junta.

    Putin’s response was to accept the gift of Crimea (after a referendum asking Russia to do so), and more importantly working with Germany, France, and Ukraine (the Normandy Format) developed a set of rules (the Minsk agreements I and II) that would keep the Donbas in Ukraine, although Ukraine would have to become a federal rather than a unitary state.

    The US sabotaged the agreement, forcing first Poroshenko and then Zelenskii to repudiate them.

    Michta either is totally ignorant of recent Ukrainian history or he chooses to lie about it for nefarious purposes.

    I hope the US Ruling Class comes to its senses. Minsk is still on the table, but it has become a side issue with respect to NATO expansion, missile deployment, and the nuclearization of the NATO members.

    The language coming out of Russia and China is the harshest I can remember. Even during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the leaders watched their language. And Kennedy and Khrushchev were able to reach a secret agreement that removed our Jupiter missiles from Turkey and returned the Russian missiles home.

    The US government is in complete disarray, with numerous groups struggling to control our foreign policy and military strategy. There is no telling who wins the struggle at any point, and any decision made today is subject to revision tomorrow. That is the chaotic history of Presidency and Executive as far back as Bush 41.

    So, I pessimistically expect a lot of thrashing about with no coherent response to the Russians. If so, the Russians will invade and set up their own version of a Ukrainian junta. The Hell we rained down on the Ukrainian people will be replaced by a Russian Hell.

    Pray to God that the US lies down and takes it. Otherwise Russian bombs will fall on American cities. Decapitation of the civilian leadership and military leadership is the openly stated Russian war strategy.

    Happy New Year!

    PS. For what it’s worth, China fully supports the Russian position on the treaties, suggesting that a war in Europe will lead to a war in Asia.

Leave a Comment