Insights, analysis and must reads from CNN's Fareed Zakaria and the Global Public Square team, compiled by Global Briefing editor Chris Good Seeing this newsletter as a forward? Subscribe here. February 25, 2022 Fareed: Ukraine Fights for the West's Values "Russia's utterly unprovoked, unjustifiable, immoral invasion of Ukraine would seem to mark the end of an era—one that began with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989," Fareed writes in his latest Washington Post column.
Indeed, many have argued that it does. But Fareed notes that although the post-Cold War Pax Americana may be waning, it's worth remembering what prompted the present crisis. "It's very simple," Fareed writes: "the overwhelming desire of Ukrainians to live in an open, democratic society."
Formerly Soviet countries may not have perfect democracies, but they've lined up to seek it out. "(W)hat the backlash shows is that liberal democracy and the rules-based international order need to be defended—robustly, even aggressively," Fareed writes. "To those who dwell on liberal democracy's problems rather than its promise, I say, 'Let them go to Ukraine.' The people of Ukraine are showing us that those values—of an open society and a free world—can be worth fighting for and even dying for. The question for all of us is, what will we do to help them?" On the topic of Western help, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sounded encouragement after speaking with US President Joe Biden on Friday. NATO, meanwhile, has activated a response force—the ostensible remit of which, nonetheless, appears not to include fighting in Ukraine.
But Ukrainians have lamented that they are, effectively, alone. "The world is watching an insane dictator trying to slaughter us—and is letting him do it," tweets journalist Olga Rudenko.
The Economist observes the obvious: that the West has "struggle(d) to respond forcefully" to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Sanctions may not bite so hard, the magazine writes, and there are no signs of military will to defend a country that's not a member of NATO.
Resilience, however, has shown through. One can see it, for instance, in reports that a Ukrainian soldier told a Russian warship, "Go f***k yourself" when told to lay down arms—and that all 13 Ukrainian soldiers defending that island were then killed; a defiant Facebook video posted by Zelensky; reports of citizens' preparations for resistance; and Ukrainian journalist Veronika Melkozerova's New York Times essay relaying both personal terror and her grandmother's unruffled decision to stay put. Russia has earned its reputation as the world leader in "hybrid" or "gray-zone" warfare, which can involve irregular forces, cyber-attacks, and disinformation campaigns. At the Financial Times, Franz-Stefan Gady writes that Russian President Vladimir Putin has departed from that playbook, bringing conventional war back to the Continent.
Still, hybrid components can be expected, according to The Soufan Center's Intelbrief, which predicts both irregular forces and online disinformation will accompany Russia's invasion. At The Washington Post, Kyiv-based journalist Iuliia Mendel writes of claims and rumors swirling online—many of them "fake, designed to induce panic."
"US-based social-media companies, essential businesses, and critical infrastructure are all now on the front lines," Thomas S. Warrick writes for The Atlantic Council, warning that Russia could target the US directly, with unconventional means. "So, too, are the personal computers and cell phones of average Americans and Europeans, as they have become the preferred way Western publics get their news." Has the Arc of History Bent Backward? As Fareed writes, many have argued that Russia's invasion marks the end of the post-Cold War order.
There is some debate over which version of the pre-1991 order Putin seeks to resurrect. At The Spectator, historian Niall Ferguson argues Putin wants to be Peter the Great, not Joseph Stalin (and that Western leaders have allowed him to make progress in that direction, by forgetting longstanding principles of politics and war).
As for what changes we can expect to the current global arrangement, The New Statesman's Jeremy Cliffe predicts "transformed" relations between Russia and the West; that NATO will reinforce its eastern edge; that "destabilizing effects of the conflict may well travel far beyond Ukraine—to other parts of Central Europe, to the Balkans … to Central Asia and even to the Pacific"; and, potentially, a challenge to Putin's rule if the war provokes a domestic-political backlash in Russia.
Another historian, Timothy Garton Ash, draws a broad lesson in The Guardian: that "we must be prepared for a long struggle. It will take years, probably decades, for all the consequences of 24 February to be played out. ... Almost everyone in the west has now woken up to the fact that Ukraine is a European country being attacked and dismembered by a dictator. Kyiv today is a city full of journalists from all over the world. This experience will shape their views of Ukraine for ever. We had forgotten, in the years of our post-cold war illusions, that this is how nations write themselves on to the mental map of Europe: in blood, sweat and tears." Some Warn of Trouble on Two Fronts Putin's assault on Ukraine makes it more likely that Beijing will attempt a military operation to seize control of Taiwan, Michael Schuman argues at The Atlantic. At Foreign Affairs, Hal Brands foresees a loose, Russian–Chinese partnership—with the two powers not exactly working together, but with their interests generally aligned and with each adopting strategies that complement the other's—reminiscent of that between Germany and Japan circa World War II. |
