No Third World War because of Ukraine

In this war, the Americans have so far been more reserved than the Europeans. Remarkable, because usually the US Army shoots the hardest and we bump after it – see Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea. For the Europeans, the danger is here† Eastern European countries feel existentially threatened. They reason: today bombs on Kharkov and Kiev, tomorrow with us in Warsaw or Vilnius. In the political dynamism of the first week of war, the Eastern bloc pulled the Western and Southern European countries into unprecedented vigor and unity, thanks to the decisive German turn.

For the US, the battlefield is far away and the moment is inconvenient. The focus is on China. The embarrassing departure from Afghanistan, Biden’s election promise, was barely six months ago. A conflict with Russia: rather not.

Decisive for America’s reluctance, however, is another factor. In Washington’s strategic culture, nuclear risks are considered. During the most nerve-racking moments of the Cold War, this ability was of downright planetary importance, in the White House and in the Kremlin. By contrast, almost all European capitals, as well as the EU institutions, lack such strategic experience and knowledge. Exceptions are the nuclear powers Paris and London.

From the outset, Commander-in-Chief Biden is very clear: no US troops on Ukrainian territory. Support for self-defense (in line with the UN Charter), but that’s it. His country is legally and morally obligated to defend attacked NATO allies, Biden says time and again, but that duty does not extend to Ukraine. Last Friday said NATO chief Stoltenberg put it like this: “We are not part of this conflict.” That can be negotiated, but it is clear. No World War III because of Ukraine.

The unavoidable downside is that Biden repeatedly declares that he will defend “every inch” of NATO territory. Likewise in his State of the Union, last week. So no Russian bullet may land on Polish or Baltic territory or all hell will break loose. The Kremlin realizes this.

The distinction between inside and outside NATO is very tragic for the Ukrainians, who were counting on more support. But it should reassure Eastern European NATO members, under the nuclear umbrella. The reasoning ‘Kiev today, Warsaw tomorrow’ is incorrect. At least, the consequences for Russia will be of a completely different order.

The danger lies in ambiguity and borderline cases. This now revolves around the question of whether NATO no fly zone above Ukraine must and can impose. We won’t, Biden says. It involves shooting down Russian planes. Ukraine’s President Zelensky, a man in agony, will continue to ask for it – by video to the British House of Commons on Tuesday. In Europe, public pressure to act will increase as the refugee influx increases, civilian deaths increase and Kiev or Mariupol falls to the horrors of Grozny or Aleppo. We are not succumbing to nuclear blackmail, are we?

In this cauldron, escalation cannot be ruled out. If NATO comes to a standstill, experts will speak of one step higher on the ‘escalation ladder’. But that’s a wrong picture writes Jacob Parakilas in The Diplomat: see it as ‘escalation-slide† You risk a dynamic of hitting each other harder and harder, if-me-this-then-you-too-that, in which no one is in control. He considers this danger greater when nuclear powers oppose each other. Bombing a convoy unharmed on humanitarian ground is illusory.

Four recognized nuclear powers are involved in the conflict: aggressor Russia and US, UK and France. The fifth is China. For Xi, the Ukraine invasion is a test case for an attack on Taiwan. He will not like what he sees in local and western resistance. At the same time, Xi comes into a special position: mediator. No coincidence: Tuesday called Macron and Scholz with the Chinese president. Does it help prevent accidents?

Putin’s spokesperson puts three demands on the table this week: recognition of the Crimean annexation and of both Donbass republics plus the agreement that Ukraine will remain outside the ‘blocs’ (NATO and EU). This is roughly the power politics status quo before the war. Today, EU and NATO membership is only conceivable for a half-devastated ‘Western Ukraine’, west of the Dnieper, with Kiev as newly divided Berlin.

But neutrality was adamant to Kiev’s national will and our idealistic heart. Shouldn’t, couldn’t; self-determination of peoples. About our dead body† In a manner of speaking then, because it turns out their seem to be, not ours. Those who prefer to keep it that way will have to swallow principles. The White House knows how.

Luke of Middelaar is a political philosopher and historian.