Lessons Learned from Ukraine

published @ The Jakarta Post

The crisis unfolding in Ukraine might give lessons learned and paint a picture of the world we live in. American values and interests rule the world; the supply of basic needs (food, energy) is a powerful tool in international politics; the Cold War has not completely vanished; but the odds of world war are also small.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, each Soviet state declared independence from Russia, including Ukraine. In fact, the tension of the Cold War waned for some time. However, the geography of these countries — Russia in the east and western Europe in the west — creates unintended consequences.

This incurs a repeated tug-of-war between Russia and the Western bloc. On grounds of economic benefits, many European countries eagerly joined the Western bloc and NATO, but Russia is uneasy when surrounded.

So Russia interferes with domestic politics in order to keep its neighbors under Russian influence. It ignites conflicts, first in Georgia in 2008 and now, Ukraine. However, in the big picture this Ukraine conflict also tells us, at least, three things.

First, we live in a US-dominated world. It is the US that defines what is good and what is bad. When Moscow assisted the Crimea separatists, the US condemned this action and imposed sanctions. But, if we juxtapose Ukraine with Syria, we get confused with what’s right and what’s wrong. The US backs the rebels, including al-Qaeda-linked Islamists, to topple the legitimate regime. It also did this in Libya. And the world must acquiesce and never impose any sanctions.

However, the US is absolutely not all that bad. Thanks to the US, the world flourishes with innovations, respect of human rights, freedom to choose and democracy.

Their values are virtuous, though sometimes they don’t walk the talk. It can’t imagines if the most powerful country were to be Russia or China.

Second, the security of basic needs (food, energy) is very important to any country. Self-sufficiency is a must, otherwise the supplier will dictate. In terms of energy, Ukraine is very fragile. Each bold decision made by Ukrainian leaders always brings the fear of the gas supply being cut off by Gazprom, the Russian gas company owned by the government. Back in 1973, the Arabs adopted this very “weapon” to support Egypt against Israel in the Yom Kippur War.

This cautionary tale might also happen in regards to the food supply. This explains why the most advanced countries — belied to their preaching of free trade — always give subsidies to their farmers. It’s simply because they don’t want to starve in case of war with food suppliers.

Once, Indonesia depended on US-made weapons systems. Due to human rights infringement in Timor Leste, the US banned spare parts supplies and left the weapons in bad shape.

Third, the whole world is more civilized now than it was hundreds years ago. This confirms the thesis of Steven Pinker, the author of bestselling book, The Better Angels of Our Nature, which argues that violence among nations and among people has declined throughout human history. Nowadays, people more often resolve disputes with talks rather than weapons.

As the crises are escalating in Ukraine and in Syria, solutions through diplomatic channels intensify. Vladimir Putin of Russia and Barack Obama of the US call each other. And their respective foreign ministers, John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov, work hand in hand to sort out problems. Indeed, the world’s superpowers have no appetite to wage a full-scale war.

The time of war is relatively short when a superpower gets involved directly. Libya, which has no superpower backing it, is a case in point.

But the US hardly attacked overtly in Syria because of Russia’s support. The same is true in the South China Sea conflict between China and the US-supported Philippines.

Prolonged, unwinnable and mutually devastating war is always a last resort.

* * * * *