All eyes on the borders! But, which borders: the Russian-Ukrainian or the Polish-Belarusian borders? Well, it doesn’t really matter so long the borders of concern are drawn in Eastern Europe and recognized as gateways to a two-ways corridor between Russia and Europe; or, more precisely, NATO and Russia. With respect to the Russia-Ukraine border, an ‘red alert’ —in every sense and connotation the term could bear: literal, historical (i.e. recollecting the Russian annexation of the Crimean peninsula in 2014), and figurative [in reference to the Red Army and the video game as well, if you wish!]—has been given to Ukraine from Western friends and the alliance it has been toiling for years to be granted accession to, i.e. NATO.
Recently, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, as well as NATO’s Secretary Gen. Jens Stoltenberg, warned of Russia’s offensive military buildup on its borders with Ukraine. Meanwhile, the European Union has been reprimanding Belarus’ Lukashenko for ‘allegedly’ orchestrating the migrants crisis on the Belarus-Poland borderline—the latter an EU country—in retaliation for the last round of EU sanctions—which he has actually promised to do earlier (that is, retaliate, in general terms [emphasis added]) (“Poland Border Crisis: Belarus Moves Migrants Stranded in Camp”). Back to the main highlight, the red boogeyman’s—falsely-speculated as presage for imminent invasion [much emphasis added!]—military buildup on Ukraine’s border: well… one has to be a totally blind halfwit in order not to see Nord Stream 2 at the very heart of this story.
For the truth of the matter is this:
All the melodrama revolving around the presumed ‘Russian precipitous, heinous, and convoluted stratagem to invade Ukraine’ in the near future is, in its entirety, out of context. President Putin is no junior statesman to commit this sort of naïveté. For a seasoned statesman of his stature, such an undertaking at this juncture is no different than shooting oneself in the foot.
The military buildup near the Ukrainian border is a signaling measure meant to demarcate Russia’s red line vis-á-vis NATO’s eastward expansion [emphasis added].
Admittedly, though, crossing that red line (i.e. acceding Ukraine into the alliance) might constitute a casus belli for Russia. Notwithstanding, the difference between old-fashioned imperial invasion—which the United States and NATO propagated as the ulterior motive behind the Russian military mass-up—and justified war remains categorical. Every great and super power would deem the deployment of an alliance’s (or, rival’s) strategic capabilities within its immediate periphery—especially one that fundamentally identifies the former as the foremost threat to the strategic security, political system, and sovereignty of its members—a casus belli. Looking for historical precedent? Think of the United States’ stance towards the USSR’s deployment of offensive capabilities on the Cuban island, just six decades ago. Compared to Ukraine’s proximity to Russia, Cuba would not be considered “immediate” periphery as some 228 miles separate Havana from Miami.
In simple terms, the wager made here is that Russia would not invade Ukraine unless the latter’s joining NATO manifests as a fait accompli [emphasis added]; that would imply per se the deployment of NATO military forces, defensive and offensive systems in Ukraine. For, hitherto, Russia continues to view NATO as an anti-Russia Cold War relic:
“The plus-one configuration would never suffice; nor would the ‘limited-in-scope’ NATO-Russian Council; notwithstanding NATO’s reassurances in its most recent communiqué [that came out following the NATO Brussels Summit, which was held on 14 June 2021] that the Alliance is not anti-Russian per se, should Russia refrain from posing any threat to any of its member countries.
Consequently, President Putin came to the conclusion that NATO represents the last impediment standing between the attainment of Russia’s sought oneness with Europe. Hence, his proclamation in “The First Person,” that, “Russia is a country of European culture, not NATO culture,” (Stent 52).” (Nasif)
But, what does Russia stand to gain from perturbing and antagonizing Western Europe over Ukraine? Absolutely nothing! In fact, were Russia to invade and occupy Ukraine—at this particular point of time; and under this international status quo (i.e. wherein Ukraine has not yet become a NATO country)—, that endeavor would have one the prize for the biggest losing and most inopportune démarche of all time!
Militarily overrunning Ukraine would automatically sever European-Russian economic, diplomatic, and political ties; and, further, put Russian aspirations for cultural integration and oneness with the European continent on an indefinite pause. [emphasis added]
Isn’t it a bit absurd that Russia should put its relations with Europe on a deteriorating course slightly over two months after the completion of Nord Stream 2—which would double the supplies of Russian gas into Europe, and is awaiting the German end’s ‘go’ to become operational?
The licensing for Nord Stream 2 to become operational has enough intricacies of its own, and certainly does not need any further complications from the Russian side. Just last week, “Germany’s energy regulator has suspended the approval process for a major new pipeline bringing Russian gas into Europe [Nord Stream 2]…. The watchdog said on Tuesday [November 16th] it had temporarily halted the certification process because the Swiss-based consortium behind Nord Stream 2 first needed to form a German subsidiary company under German law to secure an operating license.” (Eckert)
The Nord Stream projects are of paramount economic, geopolitical, and cultural significance, in addition to moral symbolism, to the extent of making European energy security sacrosanct for Russia’s vital interests:
“Although two thirds of Russia lie in Asia; the remaining third is in Europe; and, that third carries Russia’s heart and identity. The Nord Streams represent the first direct [much emphasis added here!] Russo-European nexi, with absolutely no intermediaries, middle-parties, or middle-channels involved—none, whatsoever. The moral boost and cultural symbolism that accompany Nord Stream 2 outweigh by far both economic and political ends for Russia.
In fine, the Nord Streams are integrative projects: a tangible proof of the Russian self-perceived European identity, as well as a concrete reassurance of Russian everlasting connectedness to the European whole.” (Nasif*)
*This citation is made from, “Nord Stream 2: More than a Pipeline,” article.
Still in doubt regarding Russia’s disposition towards European energy security?
Ѕелорусси€. ћинск. 30 но€бр€ 2017. ѕрезидент Ѕелоруссии јлександр Ћукашенко и президент –оссии ¬ладимир ѕутин (слева направо) во врем€ встречи перед заседанием —овета коллективной безопасности ќƒ Ѕ во ƒворце Ќезависимости. ћихаил ћетцель/“ј——
President Putin, in a TV interview, “told Rossiya television on Saturday [November 13th] that he had spoken to his Belarus counterpart twice and hadn’t even had a “hint” of the threat to cut off gas supplies.
“Of course, in theory [my formatting], Lukashenko as a president of a transit country could order our supplies to be cut to Europe. But this would mean a breach of our gas transit contract and I hope this will not happen,” he said.
“There is nothing good in this [my formatting], and I will, of course, talk to him about this subject. Perhaps he said that in a fit of temper.”” (“Belarus-Poland Border: Putin Warns Belarus over Gas Threat to EU”)
President Putin is simply expressing, therein, his unwavering commitment to European-Russian energy relations [emphasis added].
What on earth, apart from sheer insanity, would thus justify Russia putting all this at stake? It is utterly nonsensical.
The right question to ask: Who stands to benefit most out of the current situation?
It is Ukraine’s Zelensky, not the country itself [emphasis added], without a shadow of doubt. Citing imminent Russian aggression would provide Zelensky with the patriotically knitted political/international cover he desperately needs to carry on with his domestic ‘anti-Russia witch-hunt’. More so, it would thrust a detrimental political blow to the Nord Stream projects—those he so ardently opposed and toiled against their execution; the result of which would be maintaining Ukraine’s geopolitical importance as a major transit country of energy to Europe.
But, Zelensky ought to be cautious, for this sort of adventurism may lead him in Saakashvili’s footsteps into the rough!
[For more on Zelensky’s ‘anti-Russia witch-hunt’, see, “Zelensky’s Ukraine: An Asset or a Liability for the United States?”]
As for the Poland-Belarus border crisis, it is overtly perspicuous that Russia is exploiting every ounce of political ammunition it could get from migrants agony to discredit Western claims to moral idealism vis-á-vis human rights. It is yet unclear, however, whether or not Russia had any direct or indirect involvement in the allegedly ‘Belarusian ploy’ to flock migrants to Poland’s border. Notwithstanding, the situation there is dire, on a humanitarian account, to say the least.
In summary, the maliciously propagated scheme of Russia invading Ukraine anytime soon is grossly ludicrous and far-fetched—so much so that it fails to touch upon the threshold of potentiality. To invade Ukraine, Russia would not only be running the unwarranted risk—regardless how infinitesimal the probability thereof may be—of clashing with NATO, which could spiral into World War III; but, would also be dooming the Nord Stream projects and any other means, or chance, for its unity with Europe.
Related Publications: “Nord Stream 2: More than a Pipeline;” “It Is Now Bound to a Single Act of Faith: Overcoming the 1999 Kosovo and the 2014 Ukraine Syndromes;” “A Game of Signals: Germany at the Fore, but Europe at the Center.”
Reference
“Belarus-Poland Border: Putin Warns Belarus over Gas Threat to EU.” BBC News, 13 Nov. 2021, www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59274351. Accessed 22 Nov. 2021.
Eckert, Vera. “German Regulator Puts Brake on Nord Stream 2 in Fresh Blow to Gas Pipeline.” Reuters, 16 Nov. 2021, www.reuters.com/business/energy/german-energy-regulator-suspends-nord-stream-2-certification-makes-demands-2021-11-16/. Accessed 22 Nov. 2021.
Nasif, Alan. “A Game of Signals: Germany at the Fore, but Europe at the Center.” Intelligence Scoop – A Blog Addressing Politics, Sociology, and Philosophy, Economics, and Psychology, 15 Aug. 2021, www.intel-scoop.com/a-game-of-signals-germany-at-the-fore-but-europe-at-the-center/. Accessed 23 Sept. 2021.
Nasif, Alan. “Nord Stream 2: More Than a Pipeline.” Intelligence Scoop – A Blog Addressing Politics, Sociology, and Philosophy, Economics, and Psychology, 23 Sept. 2021, www.intel-scoop.com/nord-stream-2-more-than-a-pipeline/. Accessed 22 Nov. 2021.
“Poland Border Crisis: Belarus Moves Migrants Stranded in Camp.” BBC News, 17 Nov. 2021, www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59317306. Accessed 19 Nov. 2021.
