JS: The Turkish government granted permission to the U.S. for a U.S. warship to cross into the Black Sea. Building on the idea that, let’s assume for a second, the crisis turns hot and shots are fired, do you think the conflict will remain between Ukraine and Russia just as the 2008 Russo-Georgian War stayed between Russia and Georgia, or do you think the United States might intervene? Or do you think the European Union will enter the conflict at the risk of losing its supply of gas from Russia?
VS: For Ukrainians, it’s a frustrating situation because they sense the reluctance of the European Union to give a more definite response. Such scenarios are terrifying to consider. This crisis is a real crisis, who knows what’s going to happen. No one wants war to happen. It’s terrifying to think Russians and Ukrainians, two very closely related people, would begin killing each other. This conflict will redefine lines, maybe even ethnically. Right now, it’s not an ethnic conflict but it will be if Russians are perceived as occupants and killers in an actual war.
As far as U.S. interference goes, on the one hand I think there should be a very clear and unambiguous response to what Russia is doing, and perhaps all options besides military should be explored, and they should be explored very carefully. There should not be any hesitation as to what to do. I think the west kind of hesitated during the protests in Kiev. It wasn’t clear who was in charge of the protests. There were fears that it might be some right-wing group leading the protests.
So Ukrainians don’t perceive much support besides voiced concern about violence from the west. What has been achieved is due to the Ukrainians themselves. They got rid of their corrupt criminal government themselves trying to move towards the west. The west has to meet them halfway. The west has to support them because there are unequal forces. Tiny little Ukraine and the huge country of Russia with all its military power.
Moreover, Ukraine actually signed the agreement called the Budapest Memorandum in 1994 and it was between Russia, Ukraine, the United States and Great Britain where Ukraine agreed to get rid of all nuclear weapons and become nuclear-free in exchange for protection of its integrity and sovereignty. So the United States, Great Britain and Russia signed that agreement and now Russia has violated it among other international laws.
For western countries not to interfere, it would mean that a country like Russia could break international law and avoid retaliation, and that no protection would be afforded for the country that trusted in the agreement, which could change the world’s understand of international law and how it works. What’s allowed and what’s not allowed. Other nations are going to look at this and think, “It doesn’t work. We need to have our own weapons. Because in the situation when we need help, when it’s clear to everyone, it’s a very arrogant violation of law but other countries will just say, ‘we are concerned’ or they’ll do little or nothing else.” So some kind of intervention could happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment