THE current scenario is exceedingly dangerous, according to United Nations Under-Secretary-General and head of the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA), Rosemary DiCarlo, who also noted that the reasons underlying the crisis are both complicated and long-standing.
She also discussed the broader
European security architecture, emphasising that while the problem may appear
intractable, it can and must be resolved through diplomacy.
She expressed her
disappointment that diplomatic talks in the Normandy Four format and the
Trilateral Contact Group have stalled. She emphasised that the 2015 Minsk
Agreements Package of Measures for Implementation remained the sole
UNSC-approved framework for a negotiated, peaceful settlement.
Mikko Kinnunen, the OSCE’s
Special Representative for the Chairperson-in-Office in Ukraine and a member of
the Trilateral Contact Group, emphasised the importance of the OSCE, Russian
Federation, and Ukraine continuing to engage and eventually implementing all
aspects of the Minsk agreements.
The OSCE Special Monitoring
Mission in Ukraine’s Chief Monitor, Yaşar Halit Cevik, noted that the Mission
has recorded twice as many daily ceasefire violations since the beginning of
this year as it did during the same period last year, as well as an increase in
civilian casualties as a result of shelling and small arms fire.
The OSCE stands for
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. The OSCE is the world’s
largest regional security organisation, with 57 member states from Europe,
Central Asia, and North America.
The OSCE takes a holistic
approach to security, taking into account politico-military, economic, environmental,
and human factors.
As a result, it covers a wide
variety of security issues, including arms control, confidence- and
security-building measures, human rights, national minorities, democratisation,
policing techniques, counter-terrorism, and economic and environmental
operations.
All 57 member countries are
treated equally, and decisions are reached by consensus on a political, but not
legally binding, basis. Ukraine, Russia, the US and Belarus are among the
OSCE’s members.
As a result, the OSCE can
serve as another platform for member nations to work out a peaceful solution to
this conflict. Even if they have failed to resolve this disagreement on this
platform on several occasions, the process must continue until the parties
involved reach an agreement that is in the best interests of all parties
involved.
War is not the solution;
rather, it produces a slew of interconnected sub-conflicts that will obliterate
humanity’s future existence.
Tetiana Montian, a Ukrainian
civil society activist, on the other hand, claims that Kyiv has no intention of
executing the Minsk agreements. She stated that people in the eastern Donbass
region are not represented in politics and are even being criminally punished,
and that free thought in Ukraine is being suppressed and civilians are being denied
of their civic rights.
She referred to Ukraine as a
Western colony, claiming that the true goal of Western nations is to entice
Russia into a conflict. She emphasised that the OSCE has remained oblivious to
the shelling and other forms of violence perpetrated by Ukrainian soldiers.
The purpose of this meeting,
according to Sergey Vershinin, Russian Federation Deputy Minister of Foreign
Affairs and Council President for February, is to reiterate support for the
full implementation of the Minsk agreements.
However, seven years after its
signature, Ukraine’s authorities have made it clear that they have no plans to
follow the accords, which they describe as having been signed at the
gunpoint.
Indeed, Kyiv has steadfastly
refused to engage in direct negotiations, has failed to restore economic ties
between the two countries, and has refused to grant special status to some
regions as required by the agreements.
He also chastised Western
states for turning a blind eye to such flagrant transgressions.
The United Kingdom’s Minister
of State for Europe and North America, James Cleverly, restated his support for
the Minsk agreements and emphasised that all parties must fully follow
them.
The Ukrainian people are once
again under threat of invasion by Russian troops, heavy armament, and military
vessels amassed along their borders, from Belarus to the Black Sea, according
to the statement.
He was particularly concerned
that Russian Federation diplomats in OSCE negotiations had consistently failed
to show up at the negotiating table.
While many difficulties
remain, Germany’s delegate stated that the reaffirmation of the ceasefire in
July 2020 demonstrated that progress is achievable provided political will
exists.
In a different tone, China’s
delegate commended Russia’s recent diplomatic interaction with the leaders of
France, Germany, and other countries. He said the steady growth and extension
of the North-Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO), a vestige of the cold war in eastern Europe, must be addressed because
its aim runs opposed to contemporary trends, emphasising that European
countries should make independent and strategic decisions.
Indeed, flexing muscles cannot
ensure regional stability, he added, pointing out that one NATO country refuses
to let go of its cold war mentality and continues to exacerbate tensions in the
Asia-Pacific basin.
Meanwhile, Ukraine’s
delegation expressed great worry over the Russian State Duma’s demand to
recognise the occupied sections of Ukraine’s Donetsk and Luhansk regions as
“peoples’ republics.”
He warned that such a move
would violate the Minsk agreements and jeopardise the prospects for peace, and
that Ukraine would defend itself if the situation escalated further.
In a nutshell, this is an
artificial conflict exacerbating by the US, whose hegemony is under threat, by
inventing a non-existent conflict in order to drag Russia into it, then
isolating them through economic sanctions to eliminate the threat of a hard
enemy, and then re-shifting to deal with an emerging enemy, China.
The
Minsk agreements
In 2014 and 2015, the Ukraine
and Russia signed two accords in Minsk, capital of Belarus.
The Minsk 1 agreement was
reached in September 2014 where Ukraine and Russian-backed separatists agreed
to a 12-point truce. It includes provisions for prisoner exchanges,
humanitarian relief delivery, and the removal of heavy armaments. The
arrangement immediately fell apart, with both parties breaking it.
The Minsk 2 agreement was
signed in February 2015 in Minsk by representatives from Russia, Ukraine, the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and the leaders of
two pro-Russian separatist areas.
The agreement outlined a number
of military and political actions that have yet to be undertaken. Russia’s
claim that it is not a party to the conflict and hence is not bound by its terms
has been a major roadblock.
The following are some of the
13 points in accordance with this agreement: a rapid and thorough ceasefire;
both parties withdrawing all heavy weapons; OSCE monitoring and verification;
to begin a dialogue on interim self-government for the Donetsk and Luhansk
regions in accordance with Ukrainian legislation, and to recognise their unique
status by a parliament resolution; full control of the state border by
Ukraine’s government; withdrawal of all foreign armed formations, military
equipment, and mercenaries; constitutional reform in Ukraine, including
decentralisation, with a focus on Donetsk and Luhansk; Intensify the activities
of a Trilateral Contact Group that includes Russia, Ukraine, and the OSCE.
Both agreements provide a
comprehensive solution to Russia’s and Ukraine’s ongoing conflict. The UN
Security Council, as an international organisation, must play the role of an
independent mediator, encouraging both countries to adhere to these agreements
rather than being used by other countries to achieve their hidden agenda.
The
Quadrilateral Security Dialogue
Last week, India, the US
Japan, and Australia met in Melbourne, Australia, for the QUAD or Quadrilateral
Security Dialogue. China’s destabilising position in the Indo-Pacific region,
as well as Russian aggression in Ukraine, were discussed by the leaders.
Quad, they claim, is promoting
a constructive vision for the future of Indo-Pacific that is based on shared
values. They anticipate the US and Quad will continue to engage with countries
and multilateral organisations in the Indo-Pacific, particularly ASEAN, which
will continue to play a major role in American engagement with the area.
The Quad is an informal
strategic forum and working towards a free, open, prosperous, and inclusive
Indo-Pacific area is one of the Quad’s core goals. It is seen as a grouping of
marine democracies.
The Quad’s goal is to preserve
the Indo-Pacific critical maritime corridors free of any military or political
influence. It is primarily regarded as a strategic alliance focused at minimising
Chinese dominance.
For the US, this region is
crucial for trade. The Indo-Pacific, according to the Council on Foreign
Relations, covers two oceans and numerous continents, making it vital to US
maritime interests.
In 2019, the area saw US$1.9
tril in commerce from the US. According to a UN report, 42% of global exports
and 38% of global imports are expected to travel through this region.
The QUAD and OSCE
organisations, of which the US is a member. China is not included in these
organisations. Despite the fact that Russia is a member of the OSCE, it is seen
as an enemy, and they have been “defeated” by the US on multiple occasions in
the past.
Russia does not outperform the
US or China economically. As a result, China, rather than Russia, is the
greatest threat to US dominance as the world’s unipolar superpower.
Conclusion
NATO, led by the US, has a
policy of not attacking countries that have nuclear weapons. Take, for example,
North Korea or Iran.
Unlike in Iraq, where the
International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspection panel dismantled all of Saddam
Hussein’s weapons, the US and its allies swiftly won the war in Iraq.
Russia has a vast stockpile of
weapons of mass destruction (WMD), including nuclear weapons, and their army is
one of the most technologically advanced in the world. They also had nuclear
submarines that were difficult to detect.
Russia is pursuing the
progressive integration of asymmetric force multiplier technology into its
established and legacy military systems, according to a Chatham House
assessment.
As per the report, the defence
sector is creating new military robotics systems and capabilities, and it has
successfully incorporated unmanned vehicles, particularly aerial drones, into
military operations.
Furthermore, Russia is working
on developing capabilities that might potentially counter and damage an
adversary’s satellite activities in space.
Furthermore, artificial
intelligence (AI) is being created with the goal of disrupting Western command
and control systems and communication facilities, as well as establishing
information superiority.
As a result, the Indo-Pacific
region, rather than Europe, may be the next potential conflict zone, as the
actual challenge to US supremacy is China, not Russia, and the US is gradually
increasing its military assets in this region while also tightening
collaboration among the countries in this region.
For instance, the US has
recently stated a wish to rebuild friendships with Pacific island states such
as the Solomon Islands, where the US intends to re-establish its embassy in
Honiara after it was closed in 1993.
And are we aware of the impact
that a war between world superpowers in the Indo-Pacific area will have on
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), particularly Malaysia, and how
we will protect ourselves from this potential battle that will jeopardise our
economic and security? – Feb 24, 2022.
Source: https://focusmalaysia.my/russia-ukraine-conflict-russia-denting-natos-rising-influence-part-2/
Comments