Civilised safeguards against tyranny in Europe are proving ineffective in light of Russia’s nuclear threats.
I was a teenager in the early 1980s when the Cold War was as omnipresent as The Swingers’ hit song ‘Counting the Beat’ or everyone’s favourite weekend television show Hey, Hey, it’s Saturday.
We lived in a happy-go-lucky time under a world order governed by the so-called nuclear deterrence mantra. Soviet bloc countries and the West built up arsenals of weaponry to neutralise the threat of either side triggering a war that could destroy much of the civilised world.
An uneasy, but arguably necessary, balancing act that to this day has helped prevent a third world war.
But in the blink of an eye, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has exposed the folly of the nuclear deterrent. Vladimir Putin has been able to attack a sovereign democracy precisely because he has nuclear weapons. He knows neither NATO, nor the West generally, will take military action to stop him.
His arsenal of nukes has given him the cover to create carnage, slaughter children and cause the mass displacement of millions of people. Putin is waging a horrific war and the West is deterred from intervening.
To put it crudely, Putin is having his cake and eating it.
Given my life is unchanged by Putin’s bloodlust this might sound pithy and self-indulgent. But watching a BBC news report showing husbands and fathers helping their wives and children to safety aboard trains departing Ukraine made me feel angry and useless all at once.
One father, who was staying to fight, fought back tears and clutched his four-year-old child’s toy, knowing that they may never see one another again. Just days before the family had a home, a life, a future.
If NATO – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – wasn’t created to stand up to and put down an act of aggression like Putin’s, then why was it formed?
If the United Nations security council doesn’t exist to ensure peace and stability, then why does it bother?
NATO came about in 1949, to deter “Soviet expansionism” and “forbid the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe”.
Guess what? In the mind of former KGB officer Putin, it’s 1949 all over again and he has a nuclear arsenal that, perversely, is now allowing him to expand and revive his nationalist narcissism.
As for the UN security council, it is supposed to: “Take the lead in determining the existence of a threat to the peace or an act of aggression”.
How can it do that when the Russian Federation is a permanent member and has the power to veto any substantive resolutions?
The UN security council can’t even expel Russia. It’s like allowing a serial killer to have a vote on how they should be treated after committing their crimes.
In 2003, the security council was abused by the US when it provided a litany of lies to justify starting a war with Iraq. Strangely today, the US isn’t prepared to use the truth about Russia’s actions to mount a case in the security council for some form of military intervention.
That nuclear deterrent Putin exploits has rendered the world’s policeman close to impotent. Sanctions will have long-term ramifications for the Russian tyrant and his people, but Ukraine needs help to defend itself in the short term.
No matter how loud the US, the UN and NATO scream about Putin’s war crimes and threat to peace across Europe, none have a solid plan to put him in his place.
It’s too late now, but why didn’t NATO invite Ukraine to join its ranks the moment Putin began assembling tens of thousands of troops along the border. It was abundantly clear to the US that an invasion was only a matter of when rather than if.
Article 5 of NATO’s charter makes it very clear what Putin would be up against if he was to invade a treaty member.
“The parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” the NATO document reads. “If such an armed attack occurs, each of them will assist the party or parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”
In other words, the bully would have invaded knowing full well he wasn’t just picking on the weakest kid in the schoolyard. The entire school would go after him.
NATO prides itself on guarding the freedom of its existing members. Putin gambled on the Ukraine being expendable and he will not be deterred by sanctions alone.
