Trying to get a handle on events in Ukraine is no easy
matter – Although the escalating conflict has received steady media coverage
there are still conflicting reports about the motivations and actions of the
different factions involved. Are we to believe, for example, that there is in
fact a massive groundswell of support among Russian-speaking Ukrainians to leave Ukraine and join Russia ? Who are the
armed men that have taken control of government buildings in some disputed
areas ? What does Putin ultimately hope to achieve and what can the US and
Europe actually do about Russia’s expansionist aims?
There are no easy answers, but I do think that Eugene Rumer
and Andrew S. Weiss do a pretty good job of unpacking some of the complexity in
a piece recently published on the Politico website. In it, they write of the
confused situation in Ukraine ,“The biggest obstacle to walking back from the
Abyss is Chaos. It has become a fact of life in many parts of eastern and
southern Ukraine that nobody knows who is in charge and nobody seems to know
who is in charge.”
They go on to consider how an atmosphere tinged with anarchy
has essentially created a power vacuum in this eastern European nation and,
adroitly pointing out the actual limitations that the US and Europe face in
bringing influence to bear on Russia, outline a number of logical steps to take,
conclude that a “national conversation” in Ukraine is needed. I agree, but can’t
help wondering in the middle of this explosive brew of Russian nationalism,
ethnic tension and political tension, in which people have already lost their lives,
how anyone can effectively apply the brakes in order to convene such a
conversation. In my mind, without a cessation of violence on the ground, such a
move seems intensely difficult.
There are no shortage of reasons to be concerned about this
conflict, but there is also a burning humanitarian question here: if the chaos
continues and more of the Ukraine is washed away (only to arrive on Russian
shores, as it were) will it be a neat and orderly transition that reshapes this
part of Europe, or will those who are often most at risk in such situations,
including women, children and minority groups, bear the brunt of any violence
that follows?
I believe that Rumer and Weiss have correctly focused on the chaos at the
core of this conflict as a dangerous catalyst, but they leave unaddressed the
question of how the US and Europe
might successfully reorient the principle stakeholders (Russia, Ukraine,
Russian-speaking separatists) in the direction of dialogue. Without such a
pivot, there is no reason to think that the chaos will abate any time soon, or
that the world should not be watching closely to make sure that the most
vulnerable do not become invisible in this conflict. It's the very least we can do.
Copyright Daniel E. Levenson 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment