Foreign policy is one of my foremost political interests, and one of the dominating issues in that field is currently the Ukraine-Russia crisis. Not only has the EU decidedly staked themselves in the Ukrainian camp and pledged many economic sanctions against the Russian Federation, but NATO has stepped up its military commitments. The British headlines have focused on Mr Cameron's pledge for Britain to have a leading role, with 1,000 British troops designated for a high-readiness spearhead force should Russia up its military efforts. Ultimately, this is a show of stiff solidarity by the western world as an affront to Vladimir Putin, showing that Britain, America et al. will provide more than words in the aid of Ukrainian sovereignty. John Foster Dulles is smiling down upon NATO as this amounts to something much akin to his "United Action" that he sought during the 1950s for dealing with crises in Southeast Asia. This is, however, precisely the problem; this entire system of posturing smacks of the Twentieth Century, not the supposedly more modern Twenty-First Century that we live in now!
The issue is NATO, the UN, the EU and what their member states do with them. While I would never denigrate what these institutions do to maintain peace and reduce any likelihood of a Third World War, there is a memory lapse in the thinking of the western world and a failure in understanding what constitutes a positive response to international crises. It seems that everyone is concerned with the example of 1938; allowing Hitler the operating room he wanted regarding the Czech Sudetenland and acquiescing to the expansion of the Third Reich. This is because NATO, the United Nations and the European Union were all born of the post-World War Two era that saw a ravaged Europe in dire need of rebuilding and establishment of stabilisation with fears of her then neighbour, the Soviet Union. NATO et al. were formulated, in short, to make sure 1938 would never happen again lest thresholds be crossed and conflicts escalate uncontrollably.
Ironically, no one seems to remember the crisis that 1938 was born of, despite this year being its centenary.
Before the outbreak of the First World War, Europe had slowly built itself up for a fight, with two distinct groups forming into opposing camps. The difference is, 1914's bolt-action rifles, heavy artillery and modern Dreadnought battleships are today's UAV drones, Surface to Air Missiles (SAMs) and state-of-the art Aircraft Carriers. Thankfully, the most important difference today is that we know how destructive modern war can be, even if some politicians forget this every now and then!
In this year of all years we should be REMEMBERING that base posturing is not the answer to international crises. We should be doing more of what the EU has been doing which is exercising its economic clout. Some people may not necessarily believe it at first, but losing a few Pounds/ Euros/ Dollars is better than losing your friends and family on yet more European Battlefields. Let monetary mechanics cause Mr Putin his problems, and perhaps his divided nation will become more divided and oust him from power. Presenting Russia with a large threat only stiffens the sinews and summons up the courage of the Russian Bear. Vladimir Putin may be many awful things as a leader, but he is staunchly patriotic, something that resonates well in Russia and always has done. Many argue that the Falklands War saved Mrs Thatcher from electoral defeat in 1983; there is similarity to be seen here. Handing Putin his patriotic credentials on a platter will only ever serve his purposes.
What is needed is for everyone to have a little historical memory, and remember that international crises stretch back further than 1930s Germany, and that many things have been tried before to awful result. More importantly, in the Twenty-First Century we have evolved a peaceful way of dealing with big problems like this. Spilling blood may solve a problem, but it invariably creates a bigger problem after the event.
No comments:
Post a Comment