Europe, divided on Russia, hesitant to back Biden

|
Olivier Hoslet/AP
NATO and Russian officials arrive for the NATO-Russia Council in Brussels on Jan. 12, 2022. Washington's European NATO allies are divided over how to deal with Moscow, complicating President Joe Biden's bid to present a united front that might deter any invasion of Ukraine.
  • Quick Read
  • Deep Read ( 3 Min. )

For Vladimir Putin, the timing of the Ukraine crisis could hardly be better; for Joe Biden, hardly worse.

Because a resolution of the crisis will depend not just on Moscow and Washington, but on dozens of European countries that lie between them. And America’s European allies are less ready to mount a unified response – or to make common cause with Washington – than at any time in recent years.

Why We Wrote This

What to do about Russia is not a clear-cut question for Europeans, who must balance their commitment to democracy with pressing economic realities.

Their actions in the coming days could prove critical to Washington’s hope of finding a diplomatic way out.

And in the longer run, they will help define Europe’s future strategy toward both of the major powers now locking horns over Ukraine: the United States and Russia.

President Putin’s military buildup on the Ukrainian border, along with his drive to restore Russia’s Soviet-era sphere of influence, has highlighted an awkward obstacle to any common approach in Europe: disagreement, in light of Western Europe’s economic ties with Russia, over how to balance such practical considerations with the continent’s core commitment to democratic values.

European leaders will need to make much more progress toward an answer to that question if they are to offer President Biden the solid support he is seeking.

For Vladimir Putin, the timing of the Ukraine crisis could hardly be better; for Joe Biden, hardly worse.

Because a resolution of the crisis will depend not just on Moscow and Washington, but on dozens of European countries that lie between them. And America’s European allies are less ready to mount a unified response – or to make common cause with Washington – than at any time in recent years.

Their actions in the coming days could prove critical to Washington’s hope of finding a diplomatic way out.

Why We Wrote This

What to do about Russia is not a clear-cut question for Europeans, who must balance their commitment to democracy with pressing economic realities.

And in the longer run, they will help define Europe’s future strategy toward both of the major powers now locking horns over Ukraine: the United States and Russia.

The Europeans are in the throes of what might be called a geopolitical identity crisis. Deeply unsettled by the go-it-alone presidency of Donald Trump, they have been asking themselves how much they can rely on the transatlantic alliance, especially now that Washington’s top foreign-policy priority is China.

Europe is also debating its attitude to Russia, given that the continent is much more closely linked economically with Moscow – and hugely more energy-dependent on the Russians – than the United States.

That debate has highlighted different views on how to deal with Mr. Putin: The former Soviet states near Russia have far fewer doubts on the need for a robust deterrent to his growing regional ambitions than do capitals farther west.

At the same time, the crisis also finds key European leaders preoccupied with politics closer to home.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is neck-deep in controversy over a series of Downing Street parties held at a time when the rest of the country was in lockdown. French President Emmanuel Macron faces a stern reelection test in April.

In Germany, the three-party coalition that has taken over from long-serving Chancellor Angela Merkel appears divided over how tough a line to take with Russia.

Stefan Sauer/dpa/AP/File
Pipes for the Nord Stream 2 Baltic Sea gas pipeline are stored at the port of Mukran, Germany, on Dec. 4, 2020. Russia's natural gas pipeline to Europe is built and ready to flow, but some Western leaders say the project should be scrapped if Russia invades Ukraine.

For Mr. Biden, the stakes could hardly be higher. A key element of his plan to deter Mr. Putin from invading Ukraine is to demonstrate shoulder-to-shoulder resolve across the Western alliance that the Russian president would pay an immediate and painful political and economic cost if he moved further against Ukraine.

After an 80-minute video call on Monday he declared “total unanimity with all the European leaders.”

But while that’s almost certainly true should Mr. Putin launch a full-scale invasion, it’s still not clear whether the allies would respond unanimously to lesser forms of aggression such as cyberattacks, cross-border artillery fire, missile or drone strikes, or a raid aimed at seizing further territory in eastern Ukraine and destabilizing the pro-Western government in Kyiv.

That’s what Mr. Biden referred to at a news conference last week as a “minor incursion.” In that case, he said, “we end up having a fight [with the European allies] about what to do and not do.”

That remark was undeniably a diplomatic gaffe: Ukrainian leaders accused the president of effectively giving a greenlight to Mr. Putin for such a “minor incursion.”

But it was also true. And even though, as the crisis ramps up, a number of European NATO states are sending weapons to Ukraine and beefing up their military presence in Eastern Europe, that diplomatic calculus has probably not changed.

Would Germany, for instance, be ready to mothball the new pipeline designed to carry more Russian natural gas to Europe, bypassing an existing route through Ukraine? The coalition government’s foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock, has long favored scrapping it, but there has been no sign Chancellor Olaf Scholz would contemplate that.

Germany and France also this week reopened a diplomatic track of their own. They scheduled a meeting with Russian officials within the framework of the still-unimplemented cease-fire plan they negotiated with Moscow following a Russian-supported uprising in Eastern Ukraine eight years ago.

For France, there’s a powerful, long-term logic to such separate initiatives: a desire to develop a more autonomous European role on the world stage.

That would not mean jettisoning close ties with Washington, nor unwinding the NATO security alliance. But it would recognize that Europe – collectively, the world’s third-largest economic power after the U.S. and China – has interests of its own to defend.

If President Macron is reelected in April, there is little doubt that he would continue to press for more European “strategic autonomy.”

But Mr. Putin’s military buildup, along with his drive to restore Russia’s Soviet-era sphere of influence, has highlighted an awkward obstacle to any common approach in Europe: disagreement, in light of Western Europe’s economic ties with Russia, over how to balance such practical considerations with the continent’s core commitment to democratic values.

European leaders will need to make much more progress toward an answer to that question if they are to offer President Biden the solid support he is seeking.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Europe, divided on Russia, hesitant to back Biden
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/2022/0126/Europe-divided-on-Russia-hesitant-to-back-Biden
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe