Vladimir Putin, say those who know him, does not believe in “win-win” deals. For the Russian president there is only “win-lose”. That does not augur well for talks aimed at bringing peace to Ukraine. As Ukrainian government representatives and pro-Russian separatists sat down yesterday to clinch a ceasefire, artillery fire rumbled on.
While terrorists run riot in the Middle East and Mr Putin uses guile and stealth to subvert Russia’s neighbours, Nato is once again the West’s first and last bastion of collective security.
Jihadists’ control of an area the size of Britain in Iraq and Syria is a challenge to the very concept of the nation state. Mr Putin’s supposed plan for peace in Ukraine, envisaging a withdrawal of regime forces from eastern territories, is manifestly a strategic feint.This is not the moment to hand rewards to the Kremlin, nor to neglect commitments made to the Nato alliance.
The pledge of Nato member states to spend 2 per cent of their GDP on defence by 2024 may seem onerous at a time of tightening budgets but it is one of the few clear expressions of western resolve. That only a handful of states — the United States and Britain among them — have met this target suggests weakness to autocrats and terrorists alike. Mr Putin’s warmongering in particular operates in parallel to a diplomacy of fragmentation that has been encouraged by the lukewarm behaviour of some Nato states. Moscow actively attempts to exploit the divisions between a resentful, uncertainly led US and an unenthusiastic Europe. It seeks to set the west Europeans against exposed central and east European allies. The Russian leader may be cynical about the benefits of democracy in his own country but he is aware of the cracks that can be levered open in an alliance of 28 democracies.
The defence spending target therefore has to stay in place and be implemented by all. The Nato funding model will also have to be adapted to the threat posed by an expansionist Russia. No one in Nato wants to make the collective defence of endangered member states contingent on meeting the target. The alliance has to confront Mr Putin with a united front. The five largest economies of Nato — including France, Italy and Germany, which are not meeting their targets — could make direct undertakings to those eastern members most exposed to Russian pressure in the form of financial subsidies or training and surplus equipment to build up weapons stocks in the Baltic republics.
Advertisement
Nato has solved the problem of helping a non-Nato member in distress by earmarking €15 million to four trust funds for Ukraine. These will help with logistics, cyberwarfare and building up a coherent command structure. Since Russian troops entered the fray in earnest last month, Ukrainian forces have lost ground, men and confidence in large part because of poor battlefield co-ordination. Nato quite rightly is going to give discreet advice on how to remedy these shortcomings.
The most important lesson from the Ukrainian crisis is that the West does not have the full arsenal needed to deter Mr Putin’s jab-and-pause tactics. Nato must show it is willing to fight for its alliance members should Mr Putin try to sabotage or infiltrate the Baltic states, Romania or Poland. Sanctions must now be stiffened. The next steps are to prevent defence and energy companies from raising funds on western markets, to ban western technology sales to Russia for Arctic exploration and to persuade Swift (the bank-to-bank transfer service) to block access to Russia.
If the Ukrainian government, the separatists and Moscow reach a credible and lasting peace, if the border between Ukraine and Russia is closed and secured, then these sanctions can be lifted step by step. There should be no rush to embrace Mr Putin, however, even if he assumes the garb of a peacemaker. He has forfeited our trust.