If we want to save Ukraine, we need to call Vladimir Putin’s bluff
To begin the protests, it only took a few score men. But others are now
getting sucked in, including local radicals whom Russia has been cultivating
for years, as well as volunteers attracted by a going rate on social media
of $300 to $500 a day. And some of the protesters are genuine, though they
are probably the least significant element.
The main problem for the West, in trying to contain the situation, is that
Ukrainian forces have proved completely inept. The leadership of the
National Security and Defence Council is amateurish. The army, which was
humiliated in Crimea, is painfully underfunded. The security service, the
SBU, has been thoroughly infiltrated by the Russians. In desperation, the
authorities turned to the elite Alpha unit – the very force that fired on
demonstrators in Kyiv – but its members proved less willing to lay down
their own lives. The Ministry of Defence has even started collecting
donations from ordinary citizens via SMS – nicely patriotic, but no way to
run a serious anti-insurgency campaign.
Yesterday’s de-escalation agreement in Geneva prevents the situation getting
worse on the ground, but does nothing to stop either side ratcheting up the
tension once again.
So what can, or should, we do? While there is a broader debate to be had about
sanctions and non-lethal military assistance, the first priority for the EU
and America should be to speak the truth. We don’t need to debate whether
the gunmen – the “little green men” – are Russian soldiers in disguise. They
just are. If Putin, or his foreign minister, tries to deny it, we should
contradict them to their face.
Next, there needs to be a better flow of information to and from Ukraine.
There are Ukrainian NGOs that are doing a good job of exposing what is
happening on the ground, but Kyiv needs to be assisted with satellite
intelligence, to show what is lurking on the border and to assess what might
be crossing it.
The West can also help with capacity-building for Ukraine’s beleaguered
institutions. Joint exercises with its armed forces in neighbouring states
would help re-professionalise their systems of command and control. When
Yanukovych was in power, the border service was one giant pool of
corruption; it is utterly unfit to monitor the border with Russia. But the
success of the EU task force sent to Moldova’s eastern border in 2005 to
block contraband to and from the rebel (and Russian-backed) “Transnistrian
Republic” showed how quickly a proper system can be put in place. And while
Western sanctions are already in place on those who backed the old regime,
they should be adapted to cut off funding for the separatists.
Above all, we should encourage the Kyiv authorities to be brave. Even
Yanukovych’s old Party of the Regions has backed away from the Russian
version of “federalism” – but there is nothing wrong with local democracy if
it means real local elections, especially since they would almost certainly
wrong-foot Putin. Opinion polls indicate that even in the east, only a
minority of Russian-speaking Ukrainians would vote for union with Moscow.
Putin is trying to put off the presidential election due in Ukraine in May.
It should not only proceed, but Kyiv should bring forward other votes in the
east. Either it would win, or Russia would try to stop the vote – which
would destroy its claim to represent the interests of the people. Either
way, the best way to end this farcical stand-off is to call Putin’s bluff.
Andrew Wilson is Reader in Ukrainian Studies at University College London
and author of the forthcoming ‘The Ukraine Crisis’ (Yale)