Dealing with a Multi-Polar Authoritarian World: The Case of the War on Ukraine

07/27/2024

By Robbin Laird

This is our 15th year of publishing.

Next year, we are publishing a book highlighting our analyses of that 15-year period.

We have seen a dramatic change from the 1990s where the United States was in a pole position to re-shape the world and craft a way ahead for Western civilization. We are now in a world not of our making.

The rise of the 21st century authoritarian states and movements have driven change in the global situation to which the liberal democracies have incoherently responded. And conflicts within our societies are providing significant rifts and disagreements which provide enhanced opportunities for multi-polar authoritarianism to further enhance their position.

Globalization as envisaged in the 1990s and the first decade of the 21st century is over  We have entered a new world in which dealing with adversaries is part of the strategic competition. We did so in the 1980s when I worked on various issues involving the Soviet Union.

But now there is a legacy of not talking to your adversaries and viewing this as a form of accommodation and weakness. Talking to your adversaries is not simply about acquiescing in what they want but better positioning yourself for the next phase of the competition.

A clear case in point is Ukraine. The goal of pushing Russia completely out of Ukraine and continuing indefinitely a war of attrition does not work to Ukraine’s long term advantage nor it is a sustainable policy for Ukraine’s allies.

A cease-fire now involves a vigorous period of strategic competition involving diplomacy, rebuilding and protecting Ukraine’s sovereignty. None of this can be achieved without dealing with the Russians and Putin.

Recently, Kate Davidson and Raphael J. Piliero published a piece in The National Interest which provided a thoughtful piece on a realistic way ahead.

They argued:

The top priority for Ukraine and its allies should be achieving terms that minimize risks to Ukraine’s sovereignty by creating a durable, sustainable peace: long-term military aid and multilateral security guarantees, Ukrainian military neutrality, and a rebuilding effort alongside economic integration with the West.

First, long-term military aid offers the best protection for Ukrainian sovereignty. Western aid and training after the 2014 invasion were enough to prepare Ukraine to deliver a shocking failure to Russia in its 2022 assault on Kyiv…

The West should offer Ukraine security guarantees that are stronger than the “assurances” offered in the Budapest Memorandum. As part of that, the United States could commit to surge aid in the event of renewed Russian aggression. The United States’s existing agreement is a framework that can be built upon for a more robust set of protections.

Second, Ukraine should reinstate its former neutrality. For their part, Western leaders should publicly recognize Ukraine’s neutral stance….  

Third, Ukraine must be rebuilt… 

While Ukraine need not relinquish its claims to territory that is rightfully theirs, insisting that all territory be returned before any negotiations, as Zelensky has, will likely detract from opportunities to cement its sovereignty. Given the choice to prioritize territorial concessions or multilateral security guarantees in peace negotiations, Ukraine would be best served by making itself as strong and steady as possible. 

As Ukraine and its Western allies formulate a strategy to end the war, leaders should remember what matters most in Ukraine: sovereignty. The key will be designing a peace that is not only resilient against future Russian aggression but also sustainable for the Ukrainian people. We hope that leaders in both the United States and Ukraine, armed with the knowledge of how past wars ended, can succeed in ensuring Ukraine remains sovereign and prosperous for decades to come.

Well none of this can be accomplished without dealing with the Russians and negotiating from strength. We did this in the past: it is even more necessary now that the “end of history” has turned into the end of the global dominance of the liberal democracies.

Featured Image: Photo 53152427 © Igor Dolgov | Dreamstime.com