Meeting Russia With Strength

David Bernell

 

Russia’s war in Ukraine represents a major threat to global order and security. That’s the message people in the West are reading and hearing (with a few minor, but loud, exceptions). It’s what the world heard from President Biden in his speech on February 24. It’s the conventional wisdom.

 

Is such thinking too alarmist? Does it overstate the case? Perhaps the worst that will happen is that this ends with Ukraine. Maybe Putin has bitten off more than he can chew and swallow. Maybe a Ukrainian insurgency will be too much to handle, while NATO, the West, the United States, and all countries in the world who oppose the Russian invasion can get by on the cheap: economic sanctions that hurt some parts of Russia, but don’t go too far because they might create costs for the very countries implementing and supporting the sanctions.

 

On the other hand, maybe the conventional wisdom is correct. There is a throughline line that can be drawn from Putin’s words and actions over the past two decades. He has called the collapse of the Soviet Union a great geopolitical catastrophe. He has sought to reestablish Russian control of former Soviet territories, through both political and military means. Russian military action started relatively small in parts of Georgia and Moldova, with later incursions annexing Crimea in 2014, intervening in Kazakhstan earlier in 2022, stationing troops in Belarus, and now by invading Ukraine. His actions are reminiscent of the expansionist Russia of the 18^th and 19^th centuries, and of course, Soviet foreign policy. Annexation, not occupation or regime change, seems to be the end goal.

 

For these reasons it would be wise to take Putin’s words and deeds at face value, and believe that he intends to extend Russian power, political and military control, and influence as far as he can take it. After all, he has benefitted thus far without paying too much of a price.

 

In a recent book called The Jungle Grows Back, Robert Kagan argued that democracy, peace, prosperity, and a world system that fosters and protects these values and outcomes requires constant work. The West has lived for so long in a world that appears peaceful, democratic and prosperous, that people have taken it for granted as the natural order, when in reality it has been true in only a part of the world for only a short time in world history.

 

To that end, if the invasion of Ukraine really is the significant threat to world security and order that many around the world believe it to be, if the jungle is indeed growing back, if this is a crisis that threatens the global system, democracy and prosperity, then stronger action is most certainly warranted. There’s just one catch. It’s going to impose costs on the West. If opposing Russia now, before it gets more powerful and further emboldened, before the costs of action get even greater, it’s going to cost something. The desire to avoid these costs is what causes the hesitancy of the United States and NATO to go further than they have gone thus far.

 

NATO has already agreed upon several measures to cause harm to the Russian economy. Military aid is also being provided, and if the government of Ukraine falls or is forced into exile, then covert military aid is likely to move into the country to supply the resistance.

 

But there is more to do. It will not be easy to get unity of action among all the NATO countries, but that is part of the work to be done. The aim must be to make Russia pay a high price for its actions, to put economic and political pressure on Russia and Putin, and to try and minimize the impact on everyone but Russia.

 

One step, called for by many parties, is to remove Russia from the SWIFT system that supports secure international banking and the movement of money around the world. Removing Russia from SWIFT immediately places major limitations on economic activity that benefits Russia.

 

Another step is to freeze or seize all assets owned by any Russian individual or company anywhere. The more countries that participate, the better. Every penny of every bank account, business, house or apartment, car, yacht, financial instrument, or other property should be made off-limits to their Russian owners. These are the people who at least tacitly support the Russian government, and who benefit from Russia’s policies and actions. Making them pay a big price for their actions may diminish support for Putin and his war.

 

Cutting off imports of Russian oil and gas to as many places as possible is another step that will impose severe costs. Russia earns 70 percent of all its foreign exchange from oil and gas sales. They are the lifeblood of the Russian economy. This will hurt Russia, but it will hurt everyone else too. This is the costliest action of all. The world, and Europe in particular, rely a great deal on Russian oil and gas. Russia supplies more than ten percent of all the oil used in the world every day. And almost 40 percent of all of Europe’s natural gas comes from Russia. Global oil prices are rising already, and they would rise even more if Russia’s exports were significantly limited.

 

The leaders of NATO should put the energy sector on notice, and begin the effort to ramp up alternative supplies. Give everyone 90 days to get started before cutting off the imports of Russian oil and gas as widely as possible. Tell oil and gas companies around the world and major oil producing countries that they have a huge opportunity coming and they need to step up. Use mandates, tax incentives and spending to start dramatically increasing the supply and usage of electric cars. Use incentives and regulations to boost energy efficiency and conservation. This is a national and worldwide challenge.

 

NATO and the West can also seek to oust Russia as a member of various international organizations, or at least propose it, if it cannot be achieved. Interpol, the IMF, the World Bank, the UN. The Russian government should no longer be considered as welcome or worthy of participation in the global community.

 

And last, there is the biggest element of all, which is to move beyond applying only economic pressure, and to also include political pressure – specifically to Putin and his government – in order to change Russian foreign policy. The countries of NATO should pledge $500 billion in aid to any new Russian government that does not include Putin and that removes all Russian troops from Ukraine. This action might have the effect of forcing Putin to look over his shoulder at all times, unable to fully trust anyone in his own government, and maybe even his inner circle. It is unclear if such a pledge would prove effective, and it’s highly unorthodox as a tool of foreign policy. However, the stakes are high, so introducing such an unusual public element to the invasion of Ukraine is warranted.

 

People all over the world have had to pay a heavy price when egotistical political leaders seek to realize their dreams of empire and national greatness. The human and economic costs go up – way up – the longer the rest of the world waits to act. It’s time to act.