The threat of war looms over Ukraine as Russia and the U.S. blame each other for the escalation of rhetoric and tensions. With more than 100,000 Russian troops in the region around its border, the Ukraine military and civilian volunteers have been conducting training exercises in front of TV cameras to prepare for a possible invasion. But Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told President Biden to “calm down the messaging” about the threat of a Russian invasion, because, he said, it was stirring panic and could trigger economic chaos.
Moscow has made several demands of NATO, including a halt to the western military alliance’s eastward expansion, a pledge that Ukraine will never become a NATO member state, and a reduction in the number western troops in Eastern European countries that were once part of the Soviet Union. U.S. and European officials have categorically rejected Moscow’s demands. But while Russian President Vladimir Putin complains that the U.S. and NATO have ignored his top security demands, he maintains that Russia is still open for more dialogue in order to diffuse tensions over Ukraine.
Between The Lines’ Scott Harris spoke with Nicolai Petro, professor of political science at the University of Rhode Island and editor of the book, “Ukraine in Crisis.” Here he shares his views on the dangerous situation in Ukraine and the appearance of new divisions within the NATO alliance.
NICOLAI PETRO: The thing I think that’s important for your listeners to realize is that while the United States and Great Britain see a threat, our Western European allies are much more cautious. And the most interesting thing, maybe is that Ukrainian officials don’t see that threat.
The Ukrainian minister of defense, the head of national security and head of the Border Patrol, the president has been on television a number of times, explaining to their own people that there is no extraordinary activity on the other side of the border and that started to come across a little bit in the Western media as well.
So I guess the question that we should be asking ourselves is why does the U.S. see a threat when the people closest to the potential threat don’t see it themselves?
SCOTT HARRIS: What do you think the answer to that question is? Why is the United States escalating its rhetoric? And we have President Biden at one point talking about an invasion from Russia into Ukraine as “inevitable?”
NICOLAI PETRO: I do have an explanation as to why the U.S. sees the threat that Ukrainian officials do not, and I happen to think it’s because I think the U.S. is playing for larger stakes here than just Ukraine.
Remember, this is all against the backdrop of Russia making demands, security demands of NATO and raising the issue of the promises that were made to Russia in the early 1990s about not expanding eastward. This begins to ask again the question of what purpose does NATO serve in a post-Cold War world?
And I think what the United States is responding to really is to preserve the status quo — for NATO, I should say. Let’s remember why NATO was created in the first place. It was created as its first secretary general, put it, “To keep the Americans and the Germans down and the Russians out.”
And that’s pretty much continues to be its mission, even after the Cold War ended. And so I think that’s what the United States wants to preserve because it allows it to keep a foothold in Europe. That’s something that is problematic for Russia because it has resulted that formulation in Russia being permanently excluded from contributing to European security and deriving the benefits of European security for itself.
The problem that we now have and this has been pointed out by Ukraine’s president, is that this rhetoric of war is actually destabilizing Ukraine. President Zelensky of Ukraine has had to go on television twice to tell his population not to panic. That’s because investors are leaving the country. The national currency has devalued 10 percent. Utilities and gasoline are skyrocketing.
And the U.S. has, you know, just added fuel to the fire by withdrawing the families of diplomatic personnel. This could go south very quickly for the United States because there are two long-term consequences of this kind of escalation for the United States. One is that it could exacerbate tensions within NATO. Already, the Germans and the French are trying to hew a different line from the United States and Great Britain.
Secondly, there could be a backlash against the United States and NATO in Ukraine itself against the West generally. And that’s because of something that a lot of people don’t talk about, it’s not just that Ukraine is choosing between East and West. There’s a third option and that’s neutrality. And that’s something that you know in this kind of situation of perpetual conflict becomes more and more attractive.
Visit professor Nicolai Petro’s website at npetro.net.
