By Kristin M. Lord and William B. Taylor
The Obama administration’s announcement this week that it plans to
quadruple military resources devoted to deterring Russia in Europe highlights
how seriously U.S. and NATO leaders view the threat posed by Russia. Ukraine is
struggling to save its young democracy and stave off public disaffection with
the new government’s valiant but halting reforms, even as Russia continues its
campaign of military and economic goading.
South across the Black and Mediterranean Seas, Tunisia is experiencing some
of its worst social unrest since the Arab Spring revolutions of 2011,
illustrating the vulnerability of the only country to push through the
transition without civil war or a return to dictatorship. U.S. leaders are
concerned about the threat posed by ISIS extremists there and across the
broader region. As in Europe, they are reportedly preparing new military
options to address the threat in both Syria and Libya.
For many Americans, and likely some U.S.
policymakers, Ukraine and Tunisia – with populations of just 45 million and 10
million respectively -- may just look like two more problems in a shockingly
long list of foreign policy challenges around the globe. Such an assessment
would be a crucial—and possibly irreversible—error, with consequences that
could cascade across whole regions and reverberate for decades.
Ukraine
and Tunisia offer crucial opportunities for America and its allies to advance
their strategic interests and potentially transform today’s dangerous security
environment at a time when U.S. national-security policy resembles an endless
and dangerous game of geopolitical whack-a-mole.
Both countries are strategic linchpins. Both countries merit U.S.
backing that includes -- but also extends far beyond -- military support.
Ukraine boasts a freely and fairly elected government in a region beset by
democratic reversal. A people-powered revolution, which tragically led to
bloodshed on Kyiv’s central square, ushered in a new reform government that is
struggling to advance fragile democratic reforms, jump-start a teetering
economy, and repel Russian and Russian-backed forces that have invaded and
occupy parts of the country.
Tunisia is the Middle East’s only Arab democracy. It also has a
freely and fairly elected government that is struggling against radical
extremists who are intent on derailing it. Tunisia is also home to four
civil society organizations that won the 2015 Nobel Peace Prize for their
success in promoting a peaceful political transition.
The success of these two countries would do far more to thwart Russian
efforts to destabilize large areas of Eurasia or counter threats posed by
Islamist extremist organizations like ISIS than any anti-propaganda initiative
or any bombing campaign in Syria. And the cost is likely to demonstrate a
far better return on investment for U.S. taxpayers than billions of dollars
spent on more tactical responses. It would help America reassert the importance
of universal values we hold dear, not just for ourselves but for all those
willing to strive for them.
During the Cold War, American strategists understood that shoring up allies
and ensuring the vitality of free-market democracies was at least as important
as defending against Cold War military provocations. American presidents from
Truman to Reagan worked to unite Europe and draw newly decolonized states in
Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America toward democratic governance and
free-market economies through the power of attraction. The success of countries
like these contributed at least as much to the Iron Curtain’s collapse as U.S.
military might; and neither would have been successful without the other.
This approach is needed now, at a time when success in Ukraine and Tunisia
is still possible but hardly assured. The strategic and moral consequences of
their failures would be enormous.
A failed Ukraine would not only dishonor the sacrifices of those who died
on the Maidan and the efforts of reformers who are fighting corruption. It
would be a clear sign to countries across Eastern Europe, the Caucusus and
Central Asia that Russian intervention cannot be deterred and that efforts to
advance democracy and participate in the international economy are unlikely to
pay off.
A failed Tunisia would not only be a tragedy for Tunisians who led the Arab
Spring and united to transform their society peacefully. It would be an
unparalleled victory for ISIS and other extremist movements – already
recruiting heavily in Tunisia -- as well as a blow to all those within the
region who wish to establish just, representative governments.
Both countries need U.S. and European assistance urgently to consolidate
their respective transitions and meet legitimate citizen demands.
This
should include:
· Financial assistance to
shore up struggling economies;
· Security assistance to
help legitimate armed forces repel unlawful and destabilizing attacks within
their borders;
· Governance assistance,
particularly to fight corruption and engage populations rapidly souring on
reform across these diverse countries; and
· Support for vocational
education, entrepreneurship, scholarships and educational exchanges to
productively engage large youth populations.
To be sure, both governments have weaknesses, including corruption,
internal political squabbles, and lack of accountability. The abrupt departure
of yet another Ukrainian reform minister is cause for particular concern. But
both governments are committed to reform and the values of participatory
governance, civic rights and rule of law in regions where all are under
siege. Their newly empowered citizens are demanding change and reform-led
growth.
A U.S. foreign policy that prioritizes Ukraine and Tunisia is a strategic vision
with the potential to transform, not just respond to, a threatening global
security environment. It is a vision both Democrats and Republicans have reason
to support.
No comments:
Post a Comment