Selim Ibraimi – Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the US is gaining a better understanding of the roots of the crisis. “We are seeing a clearer understanding from the US government that the roots of the crisis need to be addressed, rather than repeating slogans for an immediate ceasefire while Ukraine continues to be supplied with weapons…” From the recent statements of russian officials, we can see that they are playing smart games with the West and are following the same patterns of post-Cold War, even Cold War, policies that President Richard Nixon warned about in the 1960s and 1970s regarding the distrust that americans should have towards the russians.
In this regard, newly declassified documents from Vladimir Putin’s first presidential summit with US officials reveal some of the earlier reports on President Putin’s approach, which included flattery, jokes about sports, history lectures, etc. According to documents released Thursday by the U.S. National Security Archive in Washington, there are clear parallels between last week’s Alaska summit and the Moscow summit 25 years ago. The russian behavior, demands, and promises, the documents say, echo today, from last week’s meeting between President Putin and President Trump. “Putin’s aggressive approach to the Chechen war at the time and his preference for force over negotiations certainly show similarities to his current stance on Ukraine and the end of the war.”
Russia’s demands for a dividing line, security guarantees of neutrality, and the occupation of ukrainian territories all point to Russia’s actions and an unchanging worldview towards the West. Continuing on the same course by Russia may not bring long-term peace and stability, some observers say. Therefore, the security guarantees sought by Kiev and european leaders have a basis in reference to the bad experience with the Russians over the past two centuries.
Since then, and currently, the ongoing talks between the US, Russia and Ukraine with european leaders show that when it comes to security guarantees, it is very difficult to find a perfect solution, which, in particular, involves large states with strong armies that will guarantee peace between two states that still do not believe in a permanent agreement. New declassified information from the National Security Archive highlights that even the 1994 agreement on the nuclear disarmament of Ukraine, which was supposed to ensure the sovereignty of Ukraine by the US, the UK, and Russia, may not be valid at another time and under different circumstances. As has been the case during the three years of war in Ukraine, a war that will likely be rounded off with the deployment of european military troops and territorial swaps.
This will likely end with the deployment of foreign troops to prevent further war and attempts to gain as much territory as possible from both Russia and Ukraine. When it comes to international security guarantees for a state or states that depend on the security of a greater power, history usually tells us more about security guarantees. For example, since ancient times of the Greek city-states, the Persians, Romans, and Ottomans offered various security strategies to “states” that wanted security, or had them under complete control, or were forced to pay high taxes, etc.
In the case of Ukraine, security guarantees are the best way to prevent further war and bring peace for a long time. The guarantees that the West offers and the same ones that Russia must respect should not be just a blank sheet of paper. In the current case, in Ukraine, european states will be asked to be guarantors of sovereignty and territorial integrity. The way the borders for Ukraine will be defined will be a model for other states in the future. And here we come to the Balkans, where, although the terrible wars are almost over, the US model, of European states together with Russia, will play a role in the future.
However, in our previous articles, since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, we have emphasized the need to think strategically to avoid the traps that states or leaders tend to fall into. Recent declassified reports show that russian President Putin is using the same methods and style in dealing with foreign adversaries and leaders. In this time of global challenges and the decline of the West on the international stage, it will be difficult for client states that seek security guarantees from the West to effectively maintain their integrity and sovereignty. They will face the conditions of concessions to survive.
The same concessions, based on the current dynamics, will also be faced by the balkan states, especially the states with open ethnic and identity issues. It may sound daily, but as the US and european states move to make agreements to protect other states, not much can be expected of them in terms of the duration of the guarantees. In promoting stability through security guarantees, it will be essential to determine how long international guarantees will last despite the deployment of thousands of soldiers to the front lines in Ukraine or elsewhere in Europe.
Based on current developments, security guarantees are not for the long term, but they can be useful for a certain time, as in the 20th century in Europe after World War II. Historically, in ancient times, security models had a duration. This may have been due to the development of civilizations. But nowadays, in the case of either Ukraine or the Balkan states, they can last for decades or less. However, security models and much more depend on other factors, which mainly include statesmen, their behavior, and, of course, military, economic, and other capacities, which we will discuss in the following articles.
The article was written specifically for Portalb.mk. The publication rights are reserved solely for Portalb.mk and the author, according to the agreement between them.