Maidan echoes: How will the world be affected if Ukraine crisis escalates further?

American analyst: “The example of the Maidan shows that peoples in the former Soviet republics can rise up against rulers…”

The four-month-old crisis in Ukraine escalated last weekend withRussia's power play next door reaches boiling point in Crimea. For many western analysts,there are clear signs that Russian invasion to its neighbor may be a disaster for many in the region, including its architect, President Putin.

Paul Kubicek, Professor of Political Science at the US Oakland University, believes that the example of Maidan shows that peoples in the former Soviet republics can rise up against rulers, that oppression contains risks…
In an interview with TURAN’s Washington, DC correspondent, the Michigan-based analyst also commented on the reasons how Ukraine arrived at this point and what the prospects ahead might be…

Q. As we witness an old-fashioned, sort of Cold War crisis escalate in Ukraine, with Russian forces surrounding Ukrainian military outposts in Crimea, many in in the region wonder how the sides will address the crisis in a way that it doesn’t worsen this already bad situation…Where do you think we are right now?
 

A. I think we are on the brink of a major crisis, but until there is a military confrontation with casualties, I think all sides, if they wish can pull back and work for a better solution. However, the situation is extremely serious.

Q. There are so many questions about how Ukraine arrived at this point... Why is Russia so interested in the events there and why does the West want to prevent Russian intervention? How did we get here?
 

A. This is a large question. In short, Ukraine is one of the few remaining post-Soviet countries that has yet to make up "its mind" between Russia and the West. This has been going on for some time. Both sides view Ukraine as strategically important. This is especially true for Russia. From the Russian perspective, the ouster of Yanukovych might signal that it will have far diminished influence, especially if the West--in contrast to what it did after the Orange Revolution in 2004--really steps up and embraces Ukraine. I think, in some respects, Russian action in Crimea is a desperate attempt to intimidate Ukraine and the West to preserve Russian influence. I do not see, however, how this ends well for Russia.

Q. What exactly caused so many willing to risk their lives for political change in Kiev? And why has the government resisted their calls so vehemently?
 

A. Why anyone braves cold and personal health for any political cause is a good question. Many Ukrainians seem desperate and frustrated. Ballot box democracy did not deliver the results they wanted and Yanukovych was consolidating his power in an authoritarian manner. The cry of joining Europe became an excuse, a call to rally against what they have experienced and feared. The government, on its side, obviously feared losing power and tried to pass a series of laws to end the protests, but it was unsuccessful.

Q. Does Russia's military intervention mean a start of another Cold War? Putin today said, deploying Russian troops in Ukraine is "not necessary now, but is possible" What will happen in Ukraine if Russia sends troops there?
 

A. Russian HAS sent troops there. This will force the US and EU to respond, most likely with sanctions against Russia, and this will permanently burn any bridges Putin has left with the West. Unlike in Georgia, Russian troops were not fired upon. Putin does not stand on good ground claiming a right to intervene, and this will create Cold War-like rhetoric, although neither the US not the EU will send troops. The interesting question is whether Ukraine tries to send forces to the region or not.

Q. Would there be an international backlash to Russian intervention? Seems like Washington is really constrained in the topic. However, is there any red line for the US to use military force? How will the world be affected if Russia and Ukraine go to war?
 

A. The US will not use military force and probably will not give aid to Ukraine either. However, this will freeze relations between Russia and the West, which already is causing turmoil in Russian markets. There will be substantial backlash.

Q. Putin has said in the past that the breakup of the Soviet Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the twentieth century. Do you think Putin wants to re-create the Soviet Union or is he just trying to make neighboring states dependent on Russia? He has used natural gas price increases and cutoffs, embargoed key imports and stoked inter-ethnic tension as means of pressure or simply as payback...
 

A. Putin thinks the former Soviet space should be the Russian sphere of influence and has shown he is willing to use a variety of means to maintain the Russian position. The use of force is a desperate move, showing that the usual mechanisms (e.g. political alliances with local leaders) are not possible now.

Q. How would you compare Russia's Crimea tactics with what Putin has done in Georgia in 2008? How much they're simply tactical or how much they may be strategic?
 

A. There are similarities, to be sure, claiming to protect ethnic Russians and framing this as intervening for human rights. However, there is no violence in Ukraine; local people there are under no threat. This is pretty obvious. I don't think the situation is as ambiguous as in the Georgian case.

Q. Moldovan Prime Minister was yesterday here in DC and he highlighted the "frozen conflicts" as a tool in Putin's hands to "punish" Russia's former Soviet allies, who turn to Europe. Do you agree with that and if so, what should be the lessons of Ukraine for other countries in the region?
 

A. Yes, I agree. This is a means for Russia to cause trouble. The most obvious lesson, it seems, is that post-Soviet states should try to align as closely as they can with the West. I suspect there will be a new push for Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine to enter NATO.

Q. The impact of the Maidan and the victory of the Ukrainian revolution are also being closely followed in other parts of the former Soviet area, including in particular the three countries of the South Caucasus.
 

How would you highlight Maydan as an example for Azerbaijani society, for both the opposition and for the Azerbaijani authorities?
 

A. The example of the Maidan shows that peoples in the former Soviet republics can rise up against rulers, that oppression contains risks. However, we have yet to see anything like this in Azerbaijan. Although the events on the Maidan might give President Aliev some pause, his ruler seems fairly secure.

Q. As for the democratic transition, some in the west mention that it is getting difficult for the international community and partners to deal with countries like Azerbaijan where people suffer from corruption and have similar problems, which took Ukrainian protesters to the streets?
 

A. Yes, there is a fatigue about this as well as a feeling of what can the West really do. Ukraine says it needs $35 billion. No one wants to pay this to a country rife with corruption. So, yes, the West does find these problems difficult.

Q. Looking ahead, what are the West's options to protect democratic transition and security in this particular part of the world?
 

A. The most obvious option is expanding NATO, which will infuriate the Russians and cause controversy in the West as well, e.g. do we really want an alliance with this country? The EU can also offer a clearer prospect for membership. However, the people of Ukraine and in other countries need to make their voices heard at the ballot box and elect leaders who will follow this path and work with the West. Yanukovych was not this choice, obviously. The next Ukrainian leader will be more pro-Western, I am sure, and the US and the EU would be wise to give this leader support but also insist that he move Ukraine toward democracy and rule of law.

AlakbarRaufoglu
Washington, DC
03/04/2014