| 11.9°C Dublin

Russia has adopted tactics in the Ukraine reminiscent of how Hitler behaved in 1938

Close

Russian President Vladimir Putin

Russian President Vladimir Putin

REUTERS

Russian President Vladimir Putin

On August 1, 1975, the then Taoiseach, Liam Cosgrave, was one of the signatories of the Helsinki Final Act governing relations between European states. He signed along with the United States, all other European countries (except Albania) and the USSR, which at the time encompassed both Russia and Ukraine.

Article 1 of the Helsinki Final Act said the signatory states would: "respect each other's sovereign equality, juridical equality and territorial integrity" and that they would not use "force or the threat of the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state".

Ireland has a greater interest, even than that of a state which enjoys the comfort of a military alliance, in ensuring that these clear interstate principles are respected.

The Russian annexation of Crimea by force, and its present, increasingly overt invasion of eastern Ukraine is obviously a flagrant breach of the Helsinki Final Act. It is the first of its kind since the end of World War II, unless one includes the NATO action against former Yugoslavia over the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, which was then part of sovereign former Yugoslav territory. I argued at the time that this was a dangerous precedent.

As Taoiseach, I happened to have been invited to address the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on the very day the Assembly was voting to admit the Russian Federation to membership of the Council. I spoke in favour of Russian accession. Russia became a member on 28 February, 1996.

The Council of Europe is the source of a dense and comprehensive network of treaties on many topics, including human rights. These only have meaning to the extent that its members are willing to abide by international law.

The European Union itself also rests on the foundation of respect for international law.

The European Union only exists because there is an assumption that international treaties will be respected in all circumstances. The EU has no force to govern its own members beyond the force of international law in the form of EU Treaties. The European Court of Justice interprets these treaties and its rulings are accepted by all EU states.

Dividing the EU has been a long-standing Russian goal, and President Vladimir Putin's aggressive tactics appear to be succeeding in the goal of dividing the EU, in a way that previous Russian efforts have failed. At a meeting I attended last June, the new EU Foreign Representative, Federica Mogherini, admitted that, as Italian foreign minister, she had been "advocating for Putin" within the EU. Her promotion will now encourage Putin, and is more eloquent than any verbal warning he may have been given about the EU ending its "partnership" with Russia, whatever that means.

Within the EU, countries like Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Spain and Italy are relatively accommodative towards what Russia is doing, while others, like Lithuania, Poland, Estonia and Latvia are alarmed and looking for resolute action.

The bigger EU states are, painfully and unsuccessfully, trying to balance commercial interests against professed principles. The Russian tactics are very similar to those adopted by Hitler in his dealings with the Czechs in 1938, and the present tactics of the EU are not dissimilar to those of France and Britain at that time.

As 28 nations, the EU will never be able to move with the dexterity of an autocracy like Russia, but if it is not to have its policies dictated in the Kremlin, as a result of Russian pressure on energy supplies, it needs to make a radical change in its own energy policies.

It needs to build a proper energy union in Europe, independent of Russia, with complete inter-connection of its energy distribution grids. That will require a lot of (job creating) investment, and the diversion of funds from current consumption. But in the long term, a decision like this would create a new momentum with which Russia could not ignore

The EU also needs to reflect on the contradictory messages it is sending out about nuclear disarmament.

Libya, which had got rid of its nuclear weapons programme, was attacked by EU countries, who were supporting the ouster of the Gaddafi regime.

In an agreement to encourage it to give up the nuclear weapons on its territory, Ukraine's sovereign integrity was guaranteed, in the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, by a number of countries, including Russia, the UK and France. Against the background of what happened in Libya, recent developments in eastern Ukraine reduce the incentives for nuclear disarmament in a very dangerous way.

Given the vast economic superiority that EU countries enjoy over Russia, it is surprising that they have so little influence on it.

If EU countries refused to buy Russian gas, Putin would have to stop and think. It would hurt some EU countries much more than others, requiring the EU to compensate the nations that would suffer the most .

It is really difficult to see who can now stop Putin, except perhaps an awakened Russian public opinion, which will become sickened by the casualties Russian soldiers will suffer in a needless war against another Slav country.

Irish Independent