How Russia’s invasion of Ukraine threatens geopolitical order

Russia’s invasion not only threatens the sovereignty of Ukraine, but has undermined the entire geopolitical order, according to German security experts. “Today almost everything is different from yesterday,” political scientist Johannes Varwick of the University of Halle told DW. “We are now back in a kind of confrontation of blocs, only the borders of the Western bloc have shifted eastward compared to the time of the Cold War. Peace in Europe is a thing of the past and trust in Russia has been completely destroyed. It will take decades to restore trust between the West and Russia.”

President Vladimir Putin’s decision to send troops across the border of a sovereign nation — the largest such invasion since World War II — has set what many see as a terrifying precedent, especially for those Eastern European countries that are not members of the European Union or NATO.

Rafael Loss, security policy specialist at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), told DW he thinks the long-term consequences are still difficult to assess in the current crisis, but “at least in parts of Europe, it looks like the post-1990 order is in ruins; mostly for the in-between countries, unfortunately — the countries that are not already part of NATO or the European Union.”

For those nations, experts agree, the security situation looks much bleaker. “We might end up in a situation where the in-between spaces are being contested, where the ability of NATO and the EU to protect their influence is contested,” Loss said. “It will be more about defending the countries that are already in these clubs rather than seeking alignment with the countries who aren’t.”

Dependence on the US

This is likely to mean that Europe will once again, as in the Cold War, become more and more dependent on the United States to guarantee its defense, and the borders to Russia’s sphere of influence will become militarized. “We must now reactivate the old concept of containment against Russia,” said Varwick. “This means that we must strengthen NATO’s eastern flank and use deterrence against Putin. It is clear that Ukraine lies behind this border. Now it’s a matter of protecting the NATO members from Romania to Bulgaria, these countries are in a better situation as NATO states and can withstand possible aggression by Russia.”

This represents a dramatic reversal of the peaceful European order that many envisioned in the aftermath of the fall of the Soviet Union, when NATO and also the European Union began taking in new member states, and those countries outside the EU were successively folded into regulatory frameworks — like energy networks — in partnership with the EU. “Now we’ve been thrown back into a situation where Europe and NATO countries are no longer as willing to engage with countries further east,” said Rafael Loss.

Putin’s view

For Putin, Thursday’s incursion is entirely justified by NATO’s expansion in the early post-Soviet years, and the subsequent US interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Putin believes he is justified in moving the borders by force, because in his view NATO has done so as well,” Loss told DW. “He believes NATO used Russian weakness throughout the 1990s to redraw borders in the former Yugoslavia, to carve out Kosovo from Serbia.”

The West, meanwhile, can point to Russia’s many violations of international order over the past few years, such as interference in countries like Georgia where Russia recognized the breakaway states of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in 2008 and the annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. The latter move already violated the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, which was meant to enshrine the sanctity of borders. “That is something that successive Russian leaders have participated in negotiating and agreed to,” said Loss.

• 

  The Soviet Union is dead, but its weapons live on

  Seven decades of Kalashnikov

  The 30-round AK 47 is arguably the most recognizable firearm in the world. The Soviet engineer Mikhail Kalashnikov (pictured above in 2002) created the automatic rifle after World War II. It quickly earned a reputation for being cheap and reliable, with various armies, guerilla groups and street gangs all using the weapon to this day.

• 

  The Soviet Union is dead, but its weapons live on

  Makarov goes to space

  The 9mm Makarov pistol entered service in 1951 as a staple sidearm for the Soviet army, police and Spetsnaz special forces. Soviet cosmonauts even took the weapon to space as a part of a special survival kit, which was provided to them in case they became stranded upon landing back on Earth.

• 

  The Soviet Union is dead, but its weapons live on

  MiG-29 still flying high

  The Mikoyan MiG-29 first entered production in the early 1980s and was praised as a highly maneuverable and agile dogfighter. The original model has since been upstaged by both NATO fighters and its more expensive brother Sukhoi, but its variants are still deployed in combat. The Russian air force uses MiG-29s to target the so-called “Islamic State” forces in Syria.

• 

  The Soviet Union is dead, but its weapons live on

  Blast from the past

  The Red Army used Katyushas to devastating effect against German soldiers in World War II. The multiple rocket launchers were attached to army trucks, making them cheap and highly mobile. Its distinctive whine and appearance reminded the German soldiers of a church organ, prompting a nickname “Stalinorgel” or “Stalin’s organ.”

• 

  The Soviet Union is dead, but its weapons live on

  S-300 and its descendants

  In 2016, Russia sold its advanced aerial defense system to Iran, but kept quiet on the details. The Cold War-era version of the S-300 had a range of 150 kilometers (93 miles), and could hit targets at altitudes above 27 kilometers, with the more modern Antey 2500 system reportedly expanding the range to 400 kilometers. India and China are seeking to buy the even-more-advanced S-400 missiles.

• 

  The Soviet Union is dead, but its weapons live on

  Dragunov sniper rifle

  The Dragunov sniper rifle was first introduced to the Soviet army in 1963 and has since found its way to war theaters across the world. It was reportedly used against US soldiers in Vietnam. In 2015, the SITE Intelligence Group published photos of the “Islamic State” soldiers with Dragunov rifles.

• 

  The Soviet Union is dead, but its weapons live on

  T-34, a symbol of an era

  The Red Army owes much of its victory over Germany to the iconic T-34, which first appeared on the battlefield in 1941. The battle-tested T-34 eventually became the most widely produced tank of the war and influenced armored vehicles for decades. The Russian military still honors it by having it lead the Victory Day parade.

  Author: Darko Janjevic

Ripple effect around the world

There is also a danger that Russia’s provocation of the international order could also have a destabilizing effect on other parts of the world where crisis regions are being held together by fragile agreements and guarantees from other powers.

What could Thursday’s events mean, for instance, for China’s disputed claims to Taiwan? “I find it difficult to make a direct connection between Ukraine and Taiwan,” said Loss. “There’s a longstanding commitment to Taiwan from the United States. I think it would be a mistake to assume that because the US doesn’t intervene militarily on behalf of Ukraine it wouldn’t do so on behalf of Taiwan. But of course, the long-term political trends might encourage at least testing the credibility of US security guarantees vis a vis Taiwan.”

But the larger situation remains worrying: Loss thinks Russia’s intervention in Ukraine opens the possibility that other alliances could be tested, and that new regional arms races could recur. “If the whole alliance architecture starts to crumble, and it seems to be in the Kremlin’s interest to make it crumble, that would put a lot of pressure on a range of countries to at least flirt with nuclear proliferation, and that would have second and third-order effects in regional security relations,” said Loss. “For example, if Turkey decided to go that route, what would that mean for Saudi Arabia and Egypt?”

Closer to Europe, Germany is now likely to face intense pressure, both domestically and internationally, to boost its defense spending and retool its army. On Thursday, Army Inspector Lieutenant General Alfons Mais, one of Germany’s most senior soldiers, wrote on LinkedIn, “In my 41st year of service in peace, I would not have believed that I would have to experience another war. And the Bundeswehr, the army I am privileged to lead, stands more or less bare. … The options we can offer policymakers to support the alliance are extremely limited.”

Overnight, Putin’s decision seems to have made the world less safe. If security analysts are to be believed, it is now a world where political relations could become increasingly being determined by military strength.

Christoph Hasselbach contributed to this report

Edited by: Rina Goldenberg

While you’re here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter Berlin Briefing.

How Russia’s invasion of Ukraine threatens geopolitical order
Source: Pinoy Pop News