Putin’s North Korean Gambit
Recent events continue to indicate that the Ukraine war is not going to end anytime soon. This is because there is no indication that Russia or Ukraine, which is fully backed by Europe and the United States, are willing to backdown from their publicly held maximum positions. The peace conference convened by Switzerland on June 15-16 underlined the vast difference between the two sides and their backers. Russia did not participate in the conference and nor did China. Their absence meant that the peace conference became a one-sided affair with Ukraine and its supporters reiterating their known positions.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began on February 24, 2022. In two days-time it would therefore be twenty-eight months since the Ukraine war began. This period has witnessed military and diplomatic actions relating to the Ukraine situation. It is noteworthy that the ultimate purpose of military and diplomatic actions is to achieve political and, at times, economic objectives. On the military front the Russians could not achieve their initial objectives and consequently they failed to attain their then political aims too.
Russian military forces initially moved towards the capital Kyiv. Russia also launched severe aerial actions against military targets, critical infrastructure and also, even if inadvertently, civilian buildings. The object was to inflict such severe damage and take the capital that the Ukrainian people compelled their government led by President Volodymyr Zelensky to sue for peace. That would have enabled Russia to quickly wind down its invasion and install a friendly government in place of the Zelensky administration. However, the Russian forces got bogged down and could not take Kyiv.
Significantly, instead of the people pressing Zelensky to step down to avoid the travails of war their nationalist spirit was awakened and they stood by their President. He too showed great resolve and strength. Finally, the West could not countenance Russia succeeding in Ukraine because that would have changed equations in Europe against its interests. Hence, it decided to fully support Ukraine militarily and diplomatically and also impose further sanctions against Russia.
The failure of its initial thrust meant that Russia had to reconcile itself to militarily focus on eastern Ukraine. There it held ground and also made incremental progress. A stalemate was reached which has more or less continued for more than a year. Over the past couple of months though Russia has made some military breakthroughs in the Kharkiv region. This has led to the US Congress agreeing to the Biden administration’s proposal for funds to supply arms to Ukraine. European countries too have not let up arming Ukraine to enable Ukraine to hold ground.
The diplomatic front has recently witnessed some moves and countermoves. At the recent G7 summit in Italy the leaders of the group stated: “We reaffirm our unwavering support for Ukraine for as long as it takes. Together with our international partners, we are determined to continue to provide, military, budget, humanitarian, and reconstruction support to Ukraine and its people”. The leaders also focused on constraining Russia through sanctions and warned third countries not to allow Russia to circumvent them, including in the energy sector, or to profit through such Russian circumventions. The leaders were also critical of Russian warnings of it being prepared to use nuclear weapons. Indeed, it does not behove Russia to point to its possession of nuclear weapons. Responsible and great powers should not indulge in such sabre rattling. Indeed, everyone knows that US and Russia possess the greatest nuclear arsenals in the world. Hence, if Russia wishes to warn Ukraine’s western supporters against arming Ukraine with weapons that can cause damage to Russia it should find other means to warn them against supplying such weapons to Ukraine.
At the Swiss peace summit Ukraine’s supporters reiterated their commitment to its sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is here that lies the real problem because Russia has annexed Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. Indeed, coinciding with the Swiss summit Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that he would agree to a ceasefire if Ukraine troops withdrew from the territories annexed by Russia. This was rejected, not unexpectedly, by Ukraine and the West.
More significantly, Putin visited North Korea soon after the Swiss summit concluded. Putin announced in Pyongyang that Russia and North Korea had signed a comprehensive strategic partnership which included a clause that if either country was attacked the other would come to its assistance. This has the potential of changing the geo-strategic landscape of north-east Asia. According to media reports Putin ‘linked’ his move to the West’s support for Ukraine. The Russian move adds a new dimension to the Ukraine issue. It represents a high-stakes-poker move by Putin but is hardly one which can compel the West to change course. This is because, as noted earlier in these columns, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has upended European security. The major states of the continent can only perceive in Putin’s North Korean gambit an attempt to blackmail to which they cannot succumb without a grievous loss to their credibility.
India attended the Swiss peace conference at the Secretary level. It did not join the communique. Its representative reiterated that a way out of the crisis could only be found through ‘dialogue and diplomacy’. He also advocated a ‘sincere and practical engagement between the two parties to the conflict’. He added that “In our view, only those options available to both parties can lead to abiding peace’. The emphasis on ‘practical engagement’ and the lack of mentioning ‘respect for the territorial integrity of Ukraine’ indicates that India is advocating that a standard doctrinaire approach be abandoned and creative solutions be found by Ukraine and Russia and that others keep away from the imbroglio. Is any of this feasible in the foreseeable future?
