Alexander J.
Motyl
Vladimir Putin’s maneuverings with the West and Ukraine are often
compared to a game of chess. The comparison is spot on, with one qualification.
Contrary to the image of grandmaster he prefers, the Russian president more
closely resembles a loudmouthed barroom player who slams pieces against the
board.
The effect is intimidating at first, but the best way to beat him is to
take a deep breath, stick to your strategy, and play a consistently offensive
and defensive game.
Unfortunately, President Obama isn’t very interested in playing chess with
Putin. Maybe the State Department and the Pentagon are, but they’re hamstrung
by Obama’s apparent indifference. The European Union, almost by definition,
doesn’t play well. Indeed, its member states can’t agree on whether the game is
chess, checkers, or soccer.
Putin’s bullying and the West’s non-play give Ukraine’s leaders considerable
room for maneuver. If Kyiv had a vision of its future, it could stop reacting
to events and attempt to settle the war in eastern Ukraine on its own terms. By
announcing bold initiatives, Kyiv could take the initiative and shock
Washington and Europe out of their complacency or denial.
Consider the stalemate over the Minsk accords. France and Germany are
pressuring Ukraine to hold elections in the occupied Donbas even as the Kremlin
negates its end of the bargain by violating the ceasefire, arming Putin’s
proxies, repressing freedom of speech and assembly, and controlling the
Ukrainian-Russian border. The elections would be a violation of every value
France and Germany claim to stand for and only ensure that Russia would become
a permanent cancer on Ukraine’s body politic.
Rather than play the endless point and blame game, Kyiv could simply state
that it has temporarily suspended its sovereign right to the Donbas enclave and
will defer the elections to an appropriate international body. The OSCE or the UN
would organize, conduct, and supervise the elections from beginning to end. For
its part, Ukraine will accept the results as long as independent international
monitors declare that the election process was fair and free.
Better still, President Poroshenko could announce that he supports granting
the occupied Donbas the status of a fully sovereign region within a confederal
Ukraine. The enclave would have its own government, its own budget, its own
police, its own economy, its own laws. Kyiv wouldn’t subsidize the enclave, and
the enclave wouldn’t subsidize Kyiv. All that would bind them would be some
largely symbolic institution, perhaps a powerless council of elders that would
periodically meet, sing songs, and be merry.
Putin and his proxies would be cornered. Putin wants the Donbas to weaken
Ukraine. If you isolate the Donbas with a confederacy arrangement, the
Kremlin’s ability to infect Ukraine will be nullified. And the proxies couldn’t
say no: Ukraine would be giving them far more autonomy than they want. In the
end, Ukraine would have a bankrupt criminal state on its border rather than a
bankrupt criminal region inside its borders.
If that’s too radical, consider a third way to take the initiative:
Poroshenko could declare that Ukraine has “suspended” all efforts to
reintegrate the occupied Donbas for, say, ten years. No Minsk, no military, no
diplomacy—just freeze the status quo. After ten years, the OSCE or UN
would oversee a referendum on self-determination in the occupied Donbas
allowing the citizens to choose to return to Ukraine, remain independent, or
join Russia.
Each of these three variants has the inestimable advantage of giving
Ukraine the initiative. Kyiv would propose bold solutions that are consistent
with human rights and democratic norms, and Russia and the West would have to
respond.
Ukrainian elites must seize the initiative. If they don’t counter Putin’s
poor chess play with their smart game, they’ll lose.
No comments:
Post a Comment