When two Russian fighter jets forced down an American surveillance drone above international waters a week ago, U.S. officials warned that the “reckless” move ratcheted up the risk of “miscalculations” and “misunderstandings” between the two nuclear powers. 

Back at NATO’s strategic headquarters in a small village an hour southwest of Brussels, it was yet another incident driving home the urgency of the question keeping its planners busy around the clock: How, precisely, will NATO respond if Russia, either accidentally or intentionally, attacks a member the alliance has pledged to defend?

“Now this is a personal opinion,” Lt. Gen. Hubert Cottereau, vice chief of staff at NATO’s strategic headquarters, told the Monitor last week. “But I don’t know if we have already entered the third world war.” His point is not that NATO will soon be enmeshed in a far wider conflict, but rather to drive home how seriously military professionals take the risk of such a possibility. War preparation is a pathway, if not to peace, then to security.

One of the great hazards of war, after all – strategists throughout history have stressed – is their awful tendency to escalate suddenly. “Do you know what General MacArthur said? The biggest catastrophes can be summed up in two words: Too late,” notes Lieutenant General Cottereau, who recently served as the first-ever French deputy commander of a U.S. infantry division. “I don’t want to be too late. I want to be ready, if necessary, to fight tonight.”

For this reason, NATO has been quietly taking the step of putting its strategic headquarters on what military officials here are describing as “war fighting footing.” While it’s a shift being made without public proclamation or formal status, some of its elements were authorized by the alliance’s political council last year. Officials here characterize the move as a major one and key to what NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg calls the “biggest overhaul of [NATO’s] collective defense since the Cold War.”  

It entails everything from reorganizing how NATO forces are commanded, to weaving artificial intelligence into planning in an effort to help predict the unpredictable, to introducing cultural shifts that make it easier to, say, ask staffers to work weekends.

Such steps become “more and more urgent” with each passing week of war in Ukraine, says Ian Lesser, vice president of the German Marshall Fund of the United States. 

Poland’s pledge last week, for example, to send fighter jets to Ukraine – the first NATO nation to do so – while welcomed by Kyiv, carries with it a danger of escalation that makes some NATO allies nervous. (Slovakia followed Poland’s lead late Friday.) It was, in fact, a step roundly rejected by the United States and other nations a year ago for precisely this reason. 

“As the conflict drags on, the accumulated risks of something going wrong – whether accidentally or deliberately that would involve the defense of NATO more directly – will grow,” Dr. Lesser says.

Fabian Bimmer/Reuters

NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe Gen. Christopher Cavoli delivers a speech during the traditional St. Matthew's Day banquet at the City Hall in Hamburg, Germany, March 3, 2023. NATO is undergoing significant changes amid Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine – including a boost in troop strength approved last year by the alliance's political body, the North Atlantic Council.

NATO’s current shifts are meant to mitigate these risks, says retired Gen. Frederick “Ben” Hodges, former commander of U.S. Army forces in Europe. 

“The Russians are going to see what they might have hoped would be an alliance that was unsure of itself leaning forward even more,” he says. “And that is the best way to make sure the Russians don’t make a terrible miscalculation and attack any part of NATO.”

Given all of this, there’s widespread support within NATO among both uniformed personnel and civilian officials for the moves, says Lieutenant General Cottereau. “Everybody is convinced that something has to change – and has to change very, very rapidly.”

Centralizing resources

These changes started in Madrid last June with a NATO conference in which the North Atlantic Council, the alliance’s political body, agreed to put forces currently numbering some 41,000 – up from 4,650 in 2021 – under the command of U.S. Gen. Christopher Cavoli, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander. The plan in the years ahead is to continue to grow these forces to 300,000.

This is necessary, alliance officials say, because after the fall of the Berlin Wall, NATO’s far-flung stability operations and diffuse anti-terrorism efforts meant that NATO’s top commander had for years “retained less control over the national armed forces of member countries,” says Rafael Loss, coordinator for pan-European data projects at the European Council on Foreign Relations in Berlin. 

In the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, however, officials at NATO’s Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) grappled with a realization: “We can’t order anybody to do anything. We build plans, we build strategy, we do all of those things, but the headquarters itself doesn’t issue orders,” a NATO military official says, adding that the thinking was, “That’s not going to work.”

The war in Ukraine is also consuming weapons and equipment at a pace “many times higher than our current rate of production,” Secretary-General Stoltenberg has warned. So SHAPE is now building future war plans to “centralize the allocation of scarce resources” since, should conflict erupt, there “will be tensions” on them, Lieutenant General Cottereau says. It is also encouraging the defense industrial complexes of member nations to produce more arms.

At the same time, NATO’s strategic headquarters, as part of its war fighting footing, has become “much more ambitious in exercising its forces and capabilities,” Mr. Loss says. This is important because in the post-Cold War years, though SHAPE developed training regimes, “it had very little say over what forces it could draw on to implement” them.

Now if NATO is practicing a maritime amphibious assault, for example, “then it can say that it would be a good idea to have a battalion of Dutch forces participate as well,” he notes.

Such exercises have aims beyond just reinforcing readiness: NATO planners work closely with strategic communications teams to “develop exercises around certain messages they want to send to Russia,” Mr. Loss adds. “And one of the messages they regularly intend to send is that NATO is able to do things that Russia is not.”

Olivier Matthys/AP

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (center) addresses a media conference with Finland's Defense Minister Antti Kaikkonen (right), and Finland's Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto at NATO headquarters in Brussels on March 20, 2023. Mr. Stoltenberg calls current changes the “biggest overhaul of [NATO’s] collective defense since the Cold War.”

To aid commanders in the face of myriad complex demands, the headquarters will integrate artificial intelligence into its strategizing, Lieutenant General Cottereau says, with the ultimate aim of being able, “on the fly, to war-game the decisions we’re making during the fight.”

The goal is to use AI to “accelerate the decision-making process as well as to challenge what our military science tells us to do,” he adds. “With the AI we can cross-check our decisions.” 

The war footing considerations also run to the low-tech, as SHAPE advises member states of the need to do things like invest in their old train tracks and roads. 

Patriot missile systems and tanks have in some cases been sent to Ukraine via highways and byways because there isn’t enough railway capacity, a senior NATO military official notes. “If we let all these sophisticated weapons drive on the street” – exposing them to wear and tear – “that reduces their fighting power at the front line.”

“We’re thinking big”

Even in the service of quotidian demands, putting NATO’s strategic headquarters on war fighting footing has not been without controversy. There were those who initially bristled at the martial implications for an alliance that remains – officially, at least – at peace. Early in the invasion, enthusiasm for the idea tended to correspond with member nations’ proximity to Ukraine, NATO officials say. Yet as Russian brutality there continued unabated, members grew to overwhelmingly support the shift, they add. 

But while the move may have made some member nations’ political leaders “uneasy” at first, says Mr. Hodges. “You can believe that the chiefs of defense” for these countries “understand exactly why this needs to be done.”

And they do, says Lieutenant General Cottereau, who led strategic planning for the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Stewart, Georgia, from 2019 to 2021. During that time, he took only the American standard-issue vacation of two weeks in two years and soaked in some of the lessons America tends to impart. 

“If you want to transform an organization, you have to think big,” he says. “And that’s what we’re doing – we’re thinking big.” 

Even simply calling SHAPE a strategic “war fighting headquarters” within the alliance conveys a sense of urgency, he adds, and signals the need for empathy in the shared experience that comes with it.

“There is a huge distance not only physically but mentally between the strategic staff officer and the warfighter in the field who is freezing during the night, who is seeing his comrades dying, who is yelling for ammunition,” he says. “And that distance is the problem. 

“The people who are working in their warm offices might not sense the urgency. That’s totally human as a tendency,” he adds. “But they have to be convinced of the necessity – the absolute necessity – of what they are doing.”

Pakistan is entering week two of a high-stakes legal standoff between authorities and former Prime Minister Imran Khan – a crisis that has raised serious questions about the fairness of the judiciary.

It all began when police and security officials arrived at Mr. Khan’s Lahore residence last Tuesday after the cricketer-turned-politician refused to appear for scheduled hearings in a case related to his handling of state gifts. The arrest operation quickly transformed into a siege as Mr. Khan’s supporters repelled the police. Yesterday, as police rounded up scores of his followers and the government termed his party a “clique of militants,” the controversial leader claimed that he had narrowly escaped assassination during the chaos this weekend.

Days of violent clashes between law enforcement and activists from Mr. Khan’s political party, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), have led to fears of institutional breakdown, and justice officials now find themselves in a position where any decision will court controversy. Mr. Khan and his supporters are unlikely to accept anything less than complete exoneration. But after the standoff last week, the government has portrayed the crisis as a test case to ensure that Pakistan does not descend into anarchy and lawlessness. 

“The problem on Imran Khan’s end is that he’s making a mockery out of the system of justice,” says lawyer and political commentator Abdul Moiz Jaferii, “because [in] Pakistan – even with its very checkered past of the judiciary and the very checkered past of its politicians – you’ve never had an instance where politicians refuse to turn up to a court without consequence, and that’s what’s happening here.”

Akhtar Soomro/Reuters

Police and security officials arrived at Imran Khan’s residence last Tuesday after the former prime minister, pictured during a March 17 interview in Lahore, Pakistan, refused to appear for scheduled hearings in a case related to his handling of state gifts. An Islamabad court has since canceled Mr. Khan’s arrest warrant, and the case has been adjourned until March 30.

Court compromise

An Islamabad court canceled Mr. Khan’s arrest warrant after he turned up for a hearing at the judicial complex on Saturday, though he was unable to enter the building due to clashes between his supporters and security personnel, and the case has been adjourned until March 30. Court officials reported today that Mr. Khan was also granted a weeklong bail in new terrorism cases related to the violence incited in the capital this weekend.

“It makes no sense to me as a citizen of the country that a person who … continues to flout the law should receive the sort of relief from the courts that he has received,” says Bilal Kayani, an adviser to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.

Others in government agree. 

“The question is, what is the difference between what Mr. Khan is doing and what extremists groups do?” says Planning Minister Ahsan Iqbal. “In the heart of Lahore, which is the heart of Pakistan, Khan has created an island where there is no writ of any government or any law.”

Yet Mr. Khan’s supporters see these arrest efforts as unjust. They contend that the cases against the former prime minister are politically motivated and have been expedited to ensure that he is disqualified from holding public office before the country goes to the polls at the end of the year. 

“They [the government] have reached the conclusion that politically they simply cannot compete with Imran Khan,” says PTI Secretary-General Asad Umar. “We believe that they knew that if they used excessive force, the people would resist and then they would have fresh grounds for creating new cases against Imran Khan.”

The government has consistently denied any involvement in prosecuting Mr. Khan. 

“What is happening is Mr. Khan’s own making. He is the author of his own troubles because he refuses to obey court orders,” says Mr. Iqbal, the planning minister. Mr. Khan failed to appear in court for the initial summons and used his supporters to incite violence, including throwing petrol bombs, throwing stones, and burning police vehicles, the minister says.

Pervaiz Rashid – vice president of the government’s senior coalition partner, The Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz – has accused Mr. Khan of trying to delay the legal process for as long as it takes him to get back into power. The courts’ leniency, he says, sets a dangerous precedent. 

“By showing weakness, the courts have encouraged Mr. Khan to disobey their orders,” he says. “He knows that the cases against him are open and shut and will lead to a conviction, and so his only option is … to use delaying tactics so that the political situation changes.”

K.M. Chaudary/AP

Imran Khan's convoy drives toward Islamabad, in Lahore, Pakistan, March 18, 2023. The former prime minister reached the judicial complex on Saturday, but he was unable to enter the building due to clashes between his supporters and security personnel.

Army involvement

As is frequently the case in Pakistani politics, fingers have also been pointed at the country’s powerful military, colloquially referred to as the “establishment.” Mr. Khan has accused the Army’s top brass of working with the government to ensure that he is unable to contest elections. 

Mr. Khan, like many political leaders before him, enjoyed the support of the Pakistan Army on his path to power, only to fall out with the generals while serving as prime minister. 

“Imran Khan has become too big for the establishment to swallow,” says Fawad Chaudhry, who served as minister of information in Mr. Khan’s government. “In Pakistan the army has always acted as a deep state. They are the ones who take the decisions. Now, the kind of political environment in Pakistan is that they have to accept the role of a junior partner, which they are not ready to do.”

In his farewell address at the end of November, outgoing army chief Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa made a promise that in future the army would refrain from meddling in the country’s political affairs. Yet many, including PTI stalwart and former Human Rights Minister Shireen Mazari, allege that the army is now even more intrusive than it was under General Bajwa.

“Our military has redefined the term ‘neutral’; the interventions have become more violent and more aggressive,” she says, adding that she and others in the party believe some military leaders are driven by “a personal dislike or vendetta against Mr. Khan.”

Mr. Jaferii, the commentator, says the current military leadership would find itself “near extinction” if Mr. Khan came back into power. But he believes we’ll see Mr. Khan in court first. 

“These cases against Imran Khan are farcical; they are only speeding up now because ... the political designs of the military establishment and the government ... coinciding,” Mr. Jaferii says. But “there’s really no way out other than for him to go and eventually surrender to the court,” he adds, “because after all, we are a system of laws.“

Mr. Khan’s supporters, however, are not convinced of the legality of the cases. 

“Just look at the substance of the cases on Imran Khan,” says Mr. Chaudhry. “Hundreds and thousands of people turn up every time they try to arrest him. Why? Because the charges are so weak, the charges are so rubbish that everyone thinks it is their duty to protect Imran Khan.” 

With pressure on the courts to make a decision, and none of the stakeholders willing to back down, the crisis shows no sign of abating.

Douglas R. Clifford/Tampa Bay Times/AP

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signs the Parental Rights in Education bill on March 28, 2022, in Spring Hill, Florida. A year later, state Republicans have advanced a proposal to ban classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity through the eighth grade, expanding on the earlier law.

With legislative sessions in full swing across the nation, state lawmakers are considering a raft of bills that could change how and what students are taught.

Some of the proposed legislation addresses student mental health, teacher staffing, and the role of career and technical education. Other bills put issues such as gender studies, the teaching of history, and parent rights under the microscope. Proposed laws concerning what can or cannot exist in school classrooms and libraries related to books have also emerged as another entry point for those seeking educational reform.

In many respects, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, has led the charge in making education reforms a signature aspect of his political agenda. He garnered much attention last year after signing into law the “Stop WOKE Act,” addressing culture war issues such as how and when race, sexuality, and gender are taught in public schools. But he’s hardly the only governor or state lawmaker proposing or supporting such changes. 

So far this year, legislation has been introduced in at least 19 states that would curtail teaching related to “divisive concepts or critical race theory” in public schools or higher education institutions, according to tracking done by the National Conference of State Legislatures. More than a dozen other states have already passed similar legislation or made policy changes via administrative or board action.

As these policy debates play out in legislatures, two concepts simmering under the surface are gubernatorial authority and free speech. 

How much can governors control what’s taught inside kindergarten through 12th-grade classrooms?

The answer to this question rests in states’ rights and separation of powers. The U.S. Constitution does not include a single mention of education. Per the Tenth Amendment, education is one of the powers reserved for the states.

“Education is mentioned in every state constitution,” says Kenneth Wong, professor of education policy at Brown University. “So that’s really an important institutional context to what we are seeing today.”

Gubernatorial power, however, differs by state constitution, Mr. Wong says. Some states constrain the governor’s authority by making the legislative branch more powerful, and in other states, governors have stronger executive authority.

Even so, governors can set the tone and direction. Their proposed budgets must be approved by state lawmakers, meaning changes can occur within the legislative process, Mr. Wong says.

Additionally, many governors have authority to appoint people to state executive branch positions, though those nominations may need to be confirmed by one or both houses of the legislature. Depending on the state, governors may also nominate people to serve on state boards and commissions, which can influence education.

Mr. Wong says more than half of states allow the governor to appoint the state superintendent of public education.

Are there more restrictions on free speech inside of schools?

The First Amendment, largely considered the foundation of American democracy, only contains 45 words, yet provides that Congress shall not limit freedom of speech, press, petition, assembly, or religion.

It’s one of the simpler amendments, says Ken Paulson, director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University.

“Where it gets trickier is when we begin to look at the rights of various parties under various circumstances,” Mr. Paulson says.

Children receive their First Amendment rights at birth in the United States, though they’re not always as broad or powerful because they grow into them, Mr. Paulson says. Looking at schools, specifically, it first depends on the type of education setting.

“The First Amendment only applies if the government is involved in some way in restricting free expression,” he says. “So you take that off the table: Private schools can make their own rules to do whatever they want.”

Throughout history, when conflicts have surfaced over what children should be learning in public schools, the courts typically have deferred to local school boards and government officials – operating under the theory that those closest to the students know what’s best, Mr. Paulson says. However, he says so-called culture wars over material outside the scope of reading, writing, and math have introduced political agendas into the equation.

Mr. Paulson points to removing books from schools’ centralized libraries or teachers’ classroom libraries as a question that falls under the umbrella of free speech rights. Schools boards have “tremendous control” over curriculum, he says, but libraries are a different matter because the books housed within them are not required materials.

“The school board’s control over that is less – is somewhat less – because it’s not part of the daily curriculum of the school,” he says.

A 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case (Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico) centered around a school board’s decision to remove books from a school library. In a 5-4 vote, the nation’s highest court ruled that a trial should have been held rather than awarding summary judgment to the school board.

Justice William Brennan Jr., who authored the principal opinion, wrote that though school boards have broad discretion over school affairs, it “must be exercised in a manner that comports with the transcendent imperatives of the First Amendment.”

Do higher education institutions have greater freedom when it comes to curriculum than K-12 schools?

Yes, and that’s largely because of “academic freedom,” a concept often baked into a college or university’s mission or policy statement.

Legislation signed into law last year by Governor DeSantis has put that concept into the national spotlight. The Stop WOKE (Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees) Act, which restricts how race is discussed in schools, colleges, and workplaces, has run into a series of legal challenges. Most recently, a federal appeals court last week ruled that it cannot be enforced at public colleges and universities as the case continues to be adjudicated.

The American Association of University Professors defines academic freedom as “the freedom of a teacher or researcher in higher education to investigate and discuss the issues in his or her academic field, and to teach or publish findings without interference from political figures, boards of trustees, donors, or other entities.”

The organization goes on to say academic freedom protects the rights of faculty members “to speak freely when participating in institutional governance, as well as to speak freely as a citizen.”

Mr. Wong says academic freedom is built upon the foundation of progress.

“We don’t want to restrict the way we think and the way we think about research projects – and the way that we train our students – because that would compromise us from pushing forward with the best idea,” he says. “And the history of scientific discovery is exactly that.”

Though academic freedom gives professors a “buffer of protection,” Mr. Paulson says it’s not absolute. Academic freedom may not exist if professors do or say something that makes them incapable of performing the job they were hired to do, he says. For instance, Mr. Paulson says, if a science professor declares evolution a hoax, that makes them “ineffective as a professor” even if it’s their opinion as a citizen.

Rolling street demonstrations are threatening to destabilize another fragile post-Soviet state. But in this case, it’s not pro-Western protesters pushing back against what they see as an authoritarian drift by their government, but pro-Russian demonstrators complaining about deteriorating living standards – and, also, creeping authoritarianism.

Crowds are surging through the streets of Chisinau, the capital city of tiny Moldova, the poorest country in Europe. But fallout from the war in next-door Ukraine has made economic prospects even worse and aggravated social tensions.

What makes Moldova’s situation especially dangerous is the presence next to its border with Ukraine of a Russian-speaking statelet, Transnistria, which broke away from Moldova after a brief war in 1992 and has maintained its unrecognized independence with Russian support ever since. It still hosts an occupying Russian army of about 1,500 troops, as well as an enormous Soviet-era ammunition depot near the town of Cobasna, with about 20,000 tons of Soviet-standard weaponry that is desperately needed by both sides in the nearby conflict.

Moscow has repeatedly claimed that Ukraine may be preparing a “provocation” with the aim of invading the little territory and seizing that arms stockpile. Officials in Tiraspol, the de facto capital of Transnistria, say the pro-Western government of President Maia Sandu, which has made joining the European Union a top priority, might decide to invite the Ukrainians to attack in hopes that Moldova’s long-standing “Transnistria problem” might be solved. The country’s path to the EU, and even NATO, would be much simpler with that “frozen conflict” removed.

For their part, officials in Chisinau insist that they are facing a Russian-orchestrated attempt to overthrow the government, using the populist opposition Shor party, which brought thousands to the streets of Chisinau last week amid raging inflation and deepening joblessness.

Regardless of who is right, and whether there is indeed foreign influence intentionally attempting to stir up unrest in Moldova for its own ends, the war in Ukraine is bringing Moldova’s existing polarization to a new extreme. And it highlights how the conflict between Ukraine and Russia is destabilizing the post-Soviet region more broadly.

Aurel Obreja/AP

Moldovan police officers stand in front of the parliament building during a protest against the government in Chisinau, Moldova, March 12, 2023. Russian and Transnistrian analysts say that the Moldovan government has exacerbated the country's economic woes to try and accelerate its path into the European Union.

Another Russian plot?

Moldova is the territory of historical Bessarabia, much of which was seized by Russia from Turkey in the 19th century, and the rest taken from Romania after World War II. It’s mostly Romanian-speaking but has substantial minorities of Turkic Gagauz and Slavic Russian-speakers in Transnistria.

That ethnic mix, along with endemic poverty and corruption, has kept Moldova in a state of near perpetual political crisis since it achieved independence three decades ago. Until the war in Ukraine raised the geopolitical stakes, Moscow and the West seemed able to cooperate in joint efforts to maintain stability in the turbulent little country.

That doesn’t seem possible anymore. Western sources claim that Russian secret services have a secret plan to wage “hybrid war” to prevent Moldova from integrating with the West, using opposition parties and the Moldovan Orthodox Church, which is loosely affiliated with the Russian Patriarchate – about 80% of Moldovan Orthodox believers belong to it – along with energy blackmail and other economic threats.

“The protests in the streets are artificially created by Russian interests, using the Shor Party as their tool,” alleges Arcadie Barbarosie, executive director of the independent Institute of Public Policy in Chisinau. “The Kremlin wants to take Moldova under its control, to use it as a point from which to attack Ukraine. I don’t think our state is in immediate danger, but all this noise in the street, these protests, show that there are serious attempts underway to block Moldova’s movement toward Europe.”

Jacob Turcotte/Staff

Ms. Sandu made a trenchant speech about that before the Moldovan Parliament last week, saying that “there is no other way for the Republic of Moldova except integration into the European Union,” and “all ethnic groups of the country should unite around the idea of European integration.” She blamed “bandits” for trying to sell out Moldova to Moscow and added “the Russian army will not reach Moldova, as the Ukrainian army protects us.”

Machinations in Chisinau?

But Russian analysts say the crisis in Moldova is being exacerbated by Ms. Sandu, whose government is the most pro-Western leadership post-Soviet Moldova has seen. The idea of unifying with neighboring Romania, with whom most Moldovans share a common language and culture, has been in the air since independence from the USSR three decades ago.

Being absorbed into Romania, which is already an EU and NATO member, is a seductive idea for many Moldovans discouraged by the difficulties that have persistently swamped the little country’s efforts to establish its statehood. A quarter of Moldovans have already acquired Romanian citizenship, and some polls have suggested that majorities would vote for unification in a hypothetical referendum.

“Moldovans are experiencing rapid impoverishment, with 30% inflation and the economy contracting by about 4%,” says Dmitry Ofitserov-Belsky, an expert at the official Institute of World Economy and International Relations in Moscow. “Sandu has let this situation worsen,” he claims, “with the idea that Moldovans will accept [that] the only solution is unification with Romania, which would be a pathway into the EU.”

Given its fractured politics, epic corruption, and massive economic problems, Moldova has always been considered a poor candidate for EU membership. But Mr. Ofitserov-Belsky argues that Ms. Sandu is using the polarized geopolitics around the Ukraine war, and the claimed threat of a Russian-inspired coup, to press Europe for accelerated acceptance into the bloc.

Vladislav Culiomza/Reuters

Moldovan President Maia Sandu attends a press conference in Chisinau, Moldova, March 1, 2023. Ms. Sandu, who is staunchly pro-West, said last week that “there is no other way for the Republic of Moldova except integration into the European Union.”

“Most Moldovans would be happy with the idea of the EU solving their problems,” he says. “There are two ways that it could happen. The quickest and surest would be to unify with Romania, which is an EU member, but that is not a popular idea among Moldova’s ruling class because they would go from leaders of a country to a minor provincial elite, and their businesses would be taken over by Romanian oligarchs. But the hope of joining the EU as a sovereign nation looks doubtful, since Moldova cannot hope to meet EU criteria. Hence these passionate speeches from Sandu.”

Still, the Ukraine war is at Moldova’s doorstep, and there is considerable anxiety about its future course, especially in Transnistria.

“We feel like Transnistria is the vulnerable place through which Moldova can be drawn into the war,” says Igor Shornikov, director of the local government-backed Institute of Socio-Political and Regional Development Studies in Tiraspol. “We have a Russian peacekeeping contingent here, and they are guarding the ammunition depots. Ukraine is experiencing ‘shell starvation,’ and there is a huge store of what they need just 2 kilometers from the border, in Cobasna.”

He claims that Kyiv has offered to step in militarily to eliminate Russian control in Transnistria. “But [Ms. Sandu] needs to issue an invitation, to give a green light to Ukrainian intervention. She hasn’t done that, and there are a lot of good reasons why she shouldn’t. Everyone understands that it could lead to a much wider war.”

Reuters

A worker from the Ukrainian State Emergency Services (right) helps carry the belongings of a resident of Kalynivka village that was being evacuated March 21 because of heavy fighting.

In anticipation of winning the war against Russia, Ukraine signed an agreement last week with the European Union to ensure it would use foreign money for postwar reconstruction with “transparency, accountability, and integrity.” It also promised to set up an “integrity support unit” that would teach best practices in good governance.

Ukraine has already made progress against corruption since a democratic revolution in 2014, mainly in detecting and punishing corrupt officials. Many public records, too, are digitized and open to the public. But can Ukraine now prevent corruption by training government workers to be impartial, fair, and honest?

In a recent visit to the capital, Kristalina Georgieva, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, said Ukrainian authorities and the whole of society are “very determined” to fight corruption. Many of Ukraine’s cities have been designated as “integrity cities” for success against graft.

After the war began over a year ago, “people saw selflessness in others, began to trust more,” Yevhen Holovakha, director of the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, told the news website zn.ua. One poll showed that trust in mass media has grown from 32% to 57%, in part because reporters are seen as crucial in uncovering graft. About 84% of Ukrainians are ready to report corruption compared with 44% before the war.

A culture of personal integrity, in other words, has risen in Ukraine, and now the government wants to promote more of it. Ukrainians are less fatalistic about petty bribery, says Mr. Holovakha. “We have become less of what disgusted us.”

Ukraine’s new emphasis on preventing corruption reflects a global trend to encourage public integrity rather than merely focus on catching the corrupt.

“There have been growing calls for a renewed focus on the central role of values, ethics and integrity in controlling corruption,” states a November 2022 report from Transparency International.

The report warns that legalistic, rules-based measures “do little to create a culture of integrity.” Such measures can also crowd out the intrinsic motivation of individuals to act ethically. Many countries as well as businesses try to encourage integrity by, for example, offering “dilemma training” that poses real-life problems to workers, who are then asked to talk about their moral reasoning. “Integrity is not simply the inverse of corruption but a more expansive concept” of what is right to do, the report states.

Ukraine is about to be a grand experiment in integrity education. Its people have already shown a unity and a grit admired by other countries. Soon it may be known for elevating other virtues that can safeguard a society.