- Do you think the inception of the current crisis in Ukraine lies in the continuing eastward expansion of NATO, contrary to what was promised to Russia by the United States in the post soviet period that NATO would not expand eastward?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: President Putin has been repeatedly putting across Russia’s security concerns regarding NATO expansion for many years now. Actually, for Russia, these concerns have always been there from the early days of Soviet disintegration. Even when President Yeltsin was talking of Russia’s participation in the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) suggesting that Russia could someday become a NATO member and approved of NATO enlargement to Poland and the Czech Republic, he was criticised by the Russian parliament and the military. Russian Foreign Minister Kozyrev argued NATO was one aspect of European security and called for a new security system based on the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) (today’s OSCE) and suggested NATO subordinate itself to this CSCE, NATO rejected this. In other words even in Russia-Europe/West "honeymoon period" there were concerns with NATO. But time and again it was clear that Russia’s concerns were not being taken on board. Clinton for instance made it clear that NATO enlargement would not depend on the appearance of a new threat in Europe. So irrespective of how Russia acted enlargement would proceed, for Russia, this was a dilemma – should it move closer or turn away. It opted to move closer – relation with NATO was formalised through the Partnership for Peace Programme. Russia also presented conditions like – no deployment of nuclear weapons and no allied combat forces in the territory of new member states and this NATO agreed to. The NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997 and the Permanent Joint Council is a forum for regular consultations of NATO members and Russian officials on security issues.
A turning point in NATO-Russia relations was the Yugoslav war and the airstrikes without UN authorisation ignoring Russia’s reservations. During Putin’s first Presidency he spoke of rebuilding relations based on pragmatism and even membership. Following the 11 September attacks, Putin extended support to US and allies in Afghanistan. But NATO enlargement and the Iraq war were sticking points. Relations further deteriorated in Putin’s second term and the colour revolutions and Russia’s war in Georgia 2008. In the Bucharest summit 2008 Ukraine, Georgia membership was on the agenda, Rogozin was Russia’s ambassador to NATO conveyed Russian strong reservation in no uncertain terms of political and military consequences. I think the West has not paid attention to the Russian concerns and we have reached where we are today, it has been in the making.
- Do you think Putin's goal would be an expansion of regional dominance?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: Putin wants to do more than that, he wants to establish Russia as a global player, if you see his speeches in the last few days and even before that 2009, he has been invoking Russian history and has already stated upfront that the disintegration of Soviet Union was a tragedy.
- Since World War II there have been dozens of wars, do you think the present one is different from almost all of them?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: Yes in many ways it is. It is in Europe, a Europe which embarked on European integration to put an end to the possibility of War. War, state sovereignty, inviolability of borders are all a reality now.
- Why is Russia moving so aggressively against Ukraine? any immediate threat to Russian security from NATO?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: As I mentioned Russia has been articulating concern of NATO enlargement for long. Since the 2014 crisis and Russia’s annexation of Crimea, NATO increased its presence in the Black Sea region and has stepped up cooperation with Ukraine and Georgia. Following the 2016 NATO summit in Warsaw, NATO stepped-up practical support to Ukraine with the comprehensive assistance package and as the NATO chief is time and again reiterating it has helped train Ukrainian forces, he says they are not what they were in 2014. So they will not put NATO forces on the ground but in a way they are present. That is why we hear Putin saying the de-militarisation of Ukraine is an objective.
NATO is galvanising its forces and strengthening its presence in the Eastern frontier states but it gets activated only if Russia breaches NATO security by invading a NATO member state. And there is nothing that Russia stands to gain by doing that.
- How widespread could this conflict get? could this conflict lead to nato expansion? What are the consequences of the present crisis?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: No, I don’t think that this conflict would lead to NATO expansion, NATO enlargement has certain conditions and it does not take in countries that are already embroiled in conflict. One immediate consequence appears to be the divisions within European Union and NATO narrowing and states are coming together in response to the crisis. Nord Stream II which many European states and particularly the US had strong objections to has been suspended. During the post-Crimea sanctions Prime Minister Orban of Hungary, President Zemen of the Czech republic were vocal against them. But now European Union is presenting a united front in response to Putin’s invasion. The conflict would in my reading be confined to Ukraine, Russia would not move towards Eastern Europe which is already NATO members and would elicit a NATO military response.
- Why has the United States been so actively engaged in this crisis?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: In the security architecture of Europe, NATO and the transatlantic partnership with the US is central. If you look at the Baltic states or Poland or the other East European States they have always looked to the US for security or stationing of NATO troops. Russia is essentially challenging the power of the US and its world order.
- How would India and China respond to Russia's attack on Ukraine? Any impact on India?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: India and China have their own relation and equation with Russia. They are part of BRICS /SCO. Putin was here for an annual summit meeting last December, the first country to visit post-pandemic, our defence ties continue to be important. India has very rightly said that it would like to see a diplomatic solution to the problem taking into account legitimate security concerns of states. It is in a difficult position but has stood its ground and refrained from condemning Russia stressing the need for de-escalation. There is news that Prime Minister Modi is going to talk to President Putin and I think it is extremely important at this critical juncture to have the possibility of some conversations.
China has refused to call Putin’s move invasion and blamed the US and West for escalation and given the US-China rivalry, there is little chance that China would side with the US.
- Do you still think there is room for diplomacy? What is Putin trying to achieve?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: I hope so, but I also think hearing both President Putin and Western leaders, NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg appear to have hardened their stance. In the current scenario with the slapping of sanctions and the rhetoric, it looks difficult. Of course, we did see a flurry of visits by European leaders to Moscow but somehow they seem to be talking past each other. Putin is saying loud and clear that Russia has interests and the capability to secure them.
- Do you think the USA, the European Union and their allies have become too weak to enact painful consequences? Is the reason for Putin's move?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: Some have argued that Putin’s move is based on his calculation of the divisions in the West that were evident during the Afghanistan withdrawal and also the recent AUKUS deal that offended France. But I think that since 2014 and the non-implementation of the Minsk agreement and moves by Ukraine like its constitutional amendment in 2019 stating the objective of NATO membership made Putin more determined to counter any such possibility.
- Do you think this war could escalate to other parts of Europe?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: I don’t think that there is an immediate chance of escalation of the war in other parts of Europe.
- Who is most responsible for this looming crisis? On one side democracy is in decline around the world and on the other side autocratic rulers are increasing, what are the consequences?
Prof. Bhaswati Sarkar: On the face of it Russia, but if we look at how we have reached where we have it is evident that the West and the US have not engaged with Russia on an equal footing, brushing aside its concerns by arguing it is for sovereign states to make choices. NATO has also said that NATO membership for Ukraine is not on the cards in the immediate future so some solution like a neutral Ukraine could have been seriously discussed. Of course, whatever Putin’s calculation is about Ukraine which he terms as little Russia, it is equally true that today as an independent state it will take action and make choices based on that reality. But the East-West divide in Ukraine is also a reality, where the Russian and Russian speaking East wants a better relationship with Moscow, one may also recall that the Ukrainian Ambassador in a BBC interview did talk of Ukraine ready to reassure Russia by giving up on NATO membership, which he later retracted.
True democracy around the world is on the decline but that decline needs to be tackled and arrested at the level of the states themselves. Much harm has come to the world in the name of democracy promotion, Iraq is a case in point.
