Why do left populists often opine that war can be avoided over a cup of tea with bad actors? Jeremy Corbyn offered tea at the Commons with his “friends” in Hamas and Hezbollah. Zack Polanski seems to think that a cuppa with Putin could persuade him to behave better. All I would say to Polanski is that hypnosis might be more effective but, if he pulled off a meeting, to ensure Putin takes the first sip of any beverages.
Preventing conflict is always best and that requires deterrence and diplomacy. But Putin has set his course and made clear his ambitions over many years, in theory and in practice.
I’m not saying the Russians are coming, the Russians are coming but they went into Georgia and Ukraine and are a clear and present danger to Europe. The threat is not a theoretical one. Putin has escalated hostile actions against European nations. The Novichok attack on Salisbury in 2018 killed one British citizen but it could easily have been much higher.
Firebombs on various cargo planes happened when they were on the ground but they could have been flying over our cities. Public and private utilities and companies have been attacked at huge cost. Cables have been severed and they and energy pipelines are vulnerable and are being surveilled by Russian ships for possible future attacks.
Disinformation campaigns are dividing European countries and nearly subverted Romanian elections and were narrowly rebuffed in the strategic country of Moldova. Smaller countries can be more vulnerable.
This live threat comes home to Ireland in particular. The transatlantic data cables that carry $10 trillion a day in financial transactions mainly lie in Irish waters. But neutral Ireland has no radar, sonar, and its navy consists of 8 vessels of which only 4 are currently operational. It is seen as a weak link and an easy to push open back door to Europe.
In the 1990s I sought to help persuade Ireland to rejoin the Commonwealth for which there was some traction but I am far less certain that encouraging it to join NATO will not land well; although many in Sweden and Finland once thought that joining the collective defence organisation was an impossibility. But the reality of Irish military and security weakness remains and is one for the Republic to sort out and with urgency.
The EU has been sluggish in its response to Russia. It failed to achieve unanimity in deciding to confiscate frozen Russian assets of 210 billion Euros to keep the Ukraine war effort going but finally agreed a 105 billion Euro soft loan, which is better than nothing.
The debate in the UK on relations with Europe so far revolves around aligning more with the single market or rejoining the Customs Union. Reversing Brexit remains a dream for many but I suspect that ship has sailed.
And the debate takes place in what may be a rapidly evolving context thanks to President Trump. He always torments us and doesn’t always chicken out of actions that continue to unravel a world order which has long girded our foreign and economic policy.
Some on the left have focused on taking a moral stance by calling him out. The British government has demurred. But there is steel in this uncomfortable diplomacy. Posturing could have cost America supporting the Anglo/French plan for a security presence in Ukraine in the event of a peace deal. That was the absolute priority.
Europe remains heavily reliant on American military heft to defend its continent and to save Ukraine as an independent power without which Russian revanchism will continue to seek to subordinate the former Soviet space and divide and destabilise Europe.
It’s an open question as to how long the Trump project will keep going. There’s much bravura but huge logistical issues to overcome. The big US oil majors are being asked to risk billions in rescuing Venezuela’s ramshackle industry that expensively produces difficult to drill and refine heavy oil. The oil companies have shareholders who cannot be simply instructed to invest in an unsafe venture.
Or maybe Trump’s actions are mainly designed to divert American voters from domestic woes, lower living standards, falling popularity, and the Epstein files before the mid-term elections in November. Trump himself is becoming more ephemeral, optimists hope, and it won’t be the same if he is replaced by Rubio or Vance or even the Democrats in 2030.
In the meantime, we are trying to keep America committed to Europe and Ukraine while contemplating an American rupture with the transatlantic alliance. It’s better to postpone the day of reckoning and to use the time to prepare ourselves much more radically than we have so far done.
War and its threat often mother drastic and radical thinking. As the Nazis moved West Churchill proposed a united Ireland in return for ending Irish neutrality, for instance, and proposed a formal Anglo/French union.
Each country in NATO should be upping its defence spending. Various schemes of voluntary conscription and military training are just the beginning of what might be needed if Russia continues on its path.
But the ambition must be much bigger than any of that. Is it not also time for Europe to become a military superpower in its own right to replace or complement American power. We would all prefer pow wows around a samovar urn but sadly chai and chat won’t cut the mustard.
Gary Kent is a graduate of international relations. After spells in management in British Rail and the Co-Op he began work in parliament in 1987 where he was active for two decades on Anglo-Irish peace activity against terrorism and then in support of the Kurdistan Region in Iraq, which he has visited 40 times since 2006. He writes a foreign policy column for Progressive Britain.
Discover more from Slugger O'Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
