Russia’s attack brings changes not only in Ukraine but also in the world

Russia’s military invasion of the interior of Ukraine is one of those rare events that will not only affect the world, but will change it. This is what the Wall Street Journal columnist Gerald F. Seib claims.

He argues that by further invading a sovereign state in order to “seize it”, Russian President Vladimir Putin has effectively shattered the security architecture that has prevailed in Europe since the end of the Cold War, and no one knows what will replace it.

The U.S. effort to do what three successive presidents have pledged – to resolve other international “engagements” to focus on China – is once again in the background, and military spending is likely to rise in the West. will be overthrown.

Meanwhile, the gap that lurks in American politics, separating internationalists and neo-isolators, is becoming more visible, especially within the Republican Party.

These are just some of the side effects. Like the 9/11 terrorist attacks, this conflict, which could escalate into Europe’s largest post-World War II war, marks such a departure from the general rule, some of the consequences of which are impossible to know. with certainty, while some others are expected to emerge in unexpected ways in the coming years.

However, two effects seem certain. First, Russia has drastically accelerated Putin’s long-promised effort to regain some of the influence and territory that either the former Soviet Union held or controlled. This goal alone will affect the psychology of more than ten countries now scattered on the new, post-Soviet map of Europe. The governments of Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia will be worried about how they will be next on Putin’s list of nearby states he wants to destabilize.

Second, the Western alliances in general, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in particular, have recently united and forged their relationship.

This section will now be tested by the pressures that will follow in the coming weeks and months. If it persists, senior US officials believe, this renewed Western determination could turn Ukraine’s “adventure” into a huge strategic blunder by Putin. has repeatedly appeared ambivalent about how to deal with Putin.

In recent weeks, however, a factor that has kept Germany out of Russia has also emerged: US liquefied natural gas exports have begun to fill the gap created by the decline in Russian exports, suggesting the possibility of a new energy relationship with European allies.

A key question is whether the efforts now being made to isolate Moscow through economic sanctions will bring Russia closer to China in a substantial way. These two countries share the common goal of building “defenses” against the economic pressures that the US can exert, as the strongest force in the current “version” of the international economy.

The most immediate help China can offer Russia is simple relief from the sanctions imposed on Moscow, which will be extended. More broadly, China and Russia share the common desire to work together to create a parallel international financial system, separate from the dollar-dominated, US-dominated system. Of course, the vision from practice are two completely different things, but this vision today may seem attractive.

On the other hand, of course, it has interests stemming from its relationship with the United States and does not seem interested in breaking its ties, which could limit Sino-Russian cooperation. These conflicting interests may explain the awkward reaction so far from Beijing, which on the one hand has avoided encouraging Moscow’s move and on the other has vaguely spoken of respecting “the legitimate security concerns of the countries involved” in Ukraine.

At the second level, the rifts from Ukraine could affect seemingly irrelevant issues, such as the Biden government’s attempt to reach a new agreement with Tehran on its nuclear program. If some of Russia’s existing energy supply routes are cut off from world markets, an agreement that would open the “valves” of Iranian oil could offer significant relief. their efforts have now received a new impetus.

In a more adverse scenario, some officials worry that North Korea could seek to take advantage of the situation in Ukraine to increase its nuclear weapons and missile capabilities.

The effects of the Russian-Ukrainian crisis are being felt both inside the United States and abroad. This is because Ukraine is bringing back to the forefront the “difficult” conflict between those who favor an active global role for the United States – fearing that America’s interests will be irreparably harmed if authoritarian dictators are allowed to exercise their “wants” by force. – and those who argue that the US should withdraw from its international responsibilities and focus on its own home.

This is a gap in US politics, which has recently been embodied in former US President Donald Trump’s arguments about his “America First” strategy, which today is perhaps more represented by the Republican candidate for the Ohio Senate. , Jay Di Vance, who declares that “the Russia-Ukraine border dispute is not related to our national security” and that “our stupid leaders” are letting this conflict distract them from internal problems.

Comments that prompted the immediate response of one of the Republicans’ opponents in the primary, Jane Timken, who also describes herself as a supporter of Trump but wrote on Twitter that Americans “believe in the power of their leaders and not in indifference.”