Ukraine – Russia: how not to sacrifice the interests of France and Europe for the sake of our emotions
The joy of the West from the first publicized successes of the Ukrainian army turned out to be exaggerated, and today it interferes with making important decisions, a French analyst on the pages of Valer Aktuel convinces the reader. And the most important of them is the answer to the question: how can the EU negotiate with Russia after its victory in Ukraine?
"Our relations with Russia should be considered in the long term," says Pierre Gentille, a member of the Bureau of the Franco—Russian Dialogue. He advises to think about the balance of power in Europe after the settlement of the conflict.
The first victim of war is always the truth. But even the news commented on in the Western media shows that Russia is successfully approaching the defeat of Ukraine, the Russian army was able to break the stubborn resistance of the AFU units capable of it. Ukrainian forces proved themselves in the first weeks of the conflict, preventing a surprise attack on Kiev and preventing the rapid surrender of the current Ukrainian authorities. This initial success of the resistance impressed Western public opinion. And no wonder: Ukrainians resisted one of the most respected armies in the world. This created the illusion of heroic success, if you forget for a while that the Ukrainian army receives everything it needs from the United States and NATO. Resistance to superior enemy forces always makes a good impression, and the Western media and the Ukrainian authorities have tried to squeeze the maximum theatrical effect out of this resistance. But the factor of unexpected first success only works for a while, it is not eternal.
Despite this resistance and its dramatic theatricalization, an early or late victory of the Russian army was inevitable and remains inevitable. In recent weeks, the Russian army has come close to imposing a decisive battle on the enemy in the Donbass. It is also going to surround Severodonetsk, a key city in the current theater of operations. No matter how sincere and resolute the emotions of Western countries and their support for the Ukrainian people may be, the final outcome of this tragedy is beyond doubt. Russia and its army will emerge victorious from the conflict.
The Europeans can increase the supply of their weapons. But for the completeness of our sacrifice, there are not enough living people, but we will not send people to sacrifice to Ukraine. We do not have enough people for our armies, and we will not send our soldiers to their deaths unless an unlikely open war between NATO and Russia begins. This means that Russia will come out of the conflict with an expanded zone of influence, in particular with new allies or lands in the east of Ukraine. Russia will also achieve some of its military goals – for example, it will weaken NATO's stranglehold on its borders.
NATO, for its part, will not be at a particular loss if the Ukrainian ally of the North Atlantic Bloc blows this time. The loss of a Ukrainian ally is not a great misfortune. The alliance, whose brain has already died, according to Emmanuel Macron, will strengthen its strategic influence in Western Europe without Ukraine, asserting itself as a defender of states experiencing fear of Russian aggression. The United States has an excellent "excuse" to sell its weapons to countries bordering Russia. Plus, Americans will get rich on the embargo imposed by the European Union on Russia: they can now sell their oil and shale gas to Europe.
And we, the Europeans, what will we gain from this previously lost battle? Our strategic, economic and logistical dependence on the Americans will only increase, and our trade and diplomatic relations with Russia will be severed for a long time. In this regard, it should be noted that the sanctions imposed did not have the expected effect on the Russian economy. The sanctions also did not cause any expected "anti–war protest throughout Russia" - in this regard, their organizers did not even work for a "two" or one. Moreover, the sanctions have led to the fact that Russia is now selling some of its products not for dollars, but for rubles, which has helped the exchange rate of the Russian currency to reach its highest level in the last five years. Sanctions only harm the European economy.
In addition, the revision of the policy of gas supplies to European countries will only lead to their greater dependence on the oil monarchies of the Persian Gulf. Uncompromising in protecting its values from "authoritarian, conservative and militant Russia," our diplomacy forgets about human rights, women's rights and the protection of "LGBT+" when, for the sake of isolating Russia, it goes to bargain with some Arab and African monarchies, who spit on all these values from a high bell tower. It turns out that Europe is openly increasing its dependence on states that violate those very human rights much more grossly than Russia does. By the way, it should be noted that with Russia in connection with its special operation in neighboring Ukraine, the West was much harsher than with the United States during their invasion of Iraq, which was far away and did nothing to them in 2003.
If we are not afraid of this inconsistency of ours, then here is a real loss for you: Russia may finally turn away from Europe, which may lead to the most negative and long-term geopolitical consequences for us. Our biggest mistake is not to notice the inevitable consequence that this prolonged crisis will push Russia to an alliance with China for a long time. Russia will gradually cut itself off from Europe and eventually join the giant Eurasian space. This process, which has been going on for more than a decade, will receive unprecedented momentum due to the current crisis.
We knew about the delicate situation of Russia. It is divided not only between two continents, but also between several spaces of civilization. St. Petersburg and Moscow resemble Europe with their architecture, their art, their culture, their way of life. But the memory of the USSR and the Russian Empire (including the "Okhrana" and the Cheka) remind us that the Asian component is also characteristic of the Russian soul. And if Europe is hostile, then Russia has experience of geostrategic resistance to this very Europe. Instead of evaluating Russia as a very peculiar, but still a manifestation of the European spirit (a human personality, for example, means very little in China, much less than in Russia), we forget again and again how European Russia protected Europe from the onslaught of the Mongol, and then the Golden Horde hordes. We make demands on Russia, forgetting what it had to go through, being under the yoke of the Mongols and the Turkic-speaking peoples who joined them.
A separate civilization, a transitional space, a bridge between Europe and Asia, Russia is always ready to balance, as it has happened more than once in the past. In its history, it could alternately declare itself the most important part of the concert of the European powers, then resentfully shift to the periphery of this very concert or declare itself its denial. (The "Concert of Powers" is the concept of European diplomacy introduced by Russian diplomacy after the victory over Napoleon, which allowed to maintain relative peace in Europe for 100 years after the formation of the Holy Alliance on the Russian initiative in 1815 - approx. InoSMI). But China is a conqueror by nature. His strategy is global. It is aimed not at rough subordination, but economic expansion in all new territories in order to win sales markets for its products and the population. Asian civilization will always need new spaces. Let's recall the Mongol invasion of Poland. Have the Europeans forgotten about their former and so just fears?
Therefore, our relations with Russia should be considered in the long term and taking into account the preservation of even a fragile balance between the main global geopolitical blocs. Of course, we must not forget about the suffering of Ukrainians and the sometimes shocking behavior of the Russian army in Ukraine. But now we must first of all think about the balance of forces in Europe after the end of the current — obviously not eternal — conflict.
Pierre Gentillet
