National Security: Russia, Crimea and NATO

Editor's note: This week, we're introducing a new format from Glasgow-based columnists Michael Burns and Alec Carmichael, who have agreed to square off on issues of national and international significance. Less a debate format than an opportunity to feature in-depth discussion, "Side by Side" will feature structured analysis of current events complete with fact-checking, editorial support and, when necessary, informal arbitration. Eat your heart out social media. To suggest a topic for our duo, write to [email protected].

The last eight years has seen a sort of resurgence for Russia. Beginning with its Georgia invasion in 2008, and culminating with a border expansion and profound influence in the Middle East. Russia has been anything but shy in their efforts to regain super-power status on the world stage. Many blamed the prior administration, and rightfully so, but ignore the effects of the present administration’s national security posture towards the Kremlin, and its unchecked aggression and influence on allies and enemies alike will only grow. The absence of American leadership has indeed caused a huge, tremendous power vacuum, and unfortunately the only two countries willing to step in to fill the void are Russia and China. Neither have the global interest in mind, let alone Americas, and neither values liberty or equality.

Russia crumbled under its transition from the USSR in the 90s causing a vacuum of influence. The embarrassing national failure set up America for an easy street ascent to claim the only surviving super power title to come out of the Cold War. Russia took notice and as power dwindled, nationalism soared, leading to a rise in western confrontations which ultimately led to the establishment of the Putin oligarchy. Putin subsequently rules with no real threat to his power, and certainly with no real check or balance to his aggression over his own people and other countries. In the last eight years, he has taken on a foreign and domestic policy harkening back to his KGB days. Political and media assassinations, blackmail, suppression of minorities, harsh counter-terror tactics, war crimes, supporting tyrannical states, and supplying weaponry to American enemies just to name a few. The result has lead to a widening of Russian influence that has more than doubled the Kremlin’s sphere of operations in the world.

This takes us to the most dramatic and forthright act of war to come out of the Kremlin and directed toward the western world. In 2014 Russia annexed Crimea from the Sovereign State of Ukraine. Given that Ukraine is recognized as a country by numerous treaties and the UN, while also being in European Union Negotiations at the time it should have been a strong moment for America and Europe to halt the Kremlin’s unwanted advances on the world. This, however, was not the case. Sanctions and condemnations followed with little in way of real action or affect. Crimea is still a subject of Russia, granted by their choosing, but nonetheless illegally. Why? The truth is that America is tired of war. We feel that we have served the world more than ourselves, and we are tired of the role of global leadership. As a result President Obama took only the slightest of real actions. This emboldened the Kremlin to ramp up its roles in Syria and Iran with a renewed fervor. The effects have been disastrous. Allies have questioned our resolve, and enemies have taken note of our fatigue leading to instability and defiance amongst some of our truest threats. Without the support of our NATO allies we will certainly find it difficult to wield the influence necessary to resolve current conflicts and avoid future ones.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was established post-WWII in an effort to unite the allies of Europe and North America against the emerging Soviet threat. It has remained one of the strongest and most successful allegiances in human history. The reason for this success was the continued assurance and leadership of the United States, and the acquiescence of its members to unquestionably support each other. In the recent past, this has not been the case. When attacked by Syria early in the Syrian Civil War the NATO alliances all but ignored Turkey and their ongoing strife. Refugees pouring into Europe from Turkey further caused relationships to sour, and a recent coup d’etat, which saw western disinterest, all but forced Turkey to turn to the Kremlin, a very recent enemy, for support against terrorists, insurgents, and Syria. Instead of relying on NATO, Turkey’s use of Russia is a prelude of the near future of geopolitics in the old world, a world we will struggle to lead if we refuse to take up the position and resort to the current theme of isolationism. Our allies will be hard pressed to offer support, or assistance in our own conflicts with hostiles such as North Korea, Iran and Syria if we fail to support them in their times of need. Furthermore, if we ignore Russia as a threat to Eastern European Allies we will undoubtedly see a continued expansion of Russian influence in Europe as well.

The reason the ascent of the Kremlin is threat number one to the United States is that since the advent of history cold wars have been playing out amongst large nations most usually with dire consequences. Babylon and Persia, Rome and Carthage, China and the Mongols, Japan and China, England and France, France and Russia, and the United States and the USSR have all offered up lessons of dueling superpowers. When in conflict with a rival power, especially an economically isolated one, the chances of conflict are significantly increased. The last twenty years were remarkable in that they were devoid of a true American rival. Now there exists an axis of emerging super powers who are neither enemy nor ally, but the absence of American leadership; whether in the form of security, trade, or diplomacy; will certainly be filled by one of those three powers. The difference is neither Russia nor China have the World’s interest at heart, and that is why we must not fail to be the mechanism of influence that puts the Kremlin in check and cages the Russian bear. We should start by reassuring and strengthening our allies while owning our responsibility for destabilization in the Middle East. But I digress.