Russia-Ukraine Conflict, A European Crisis and Role of NATO: An Analysis

Russia has been amassing its troops near its border with Ukraine, and is also militarising the Black Sea and the Mediterranean in what is being called the largest display of naval capacity since the Cold War. This buildup in sea and on land by Russia has put Europe on the brink of a possible war. 

The USA has been, along with European countries, making efforts to de-escalate the tensions through diplomacy. One may ask how does it affect the USA when the confrontation is taking place in Europe, mainly between Ukraine and Russia? Another query could be why Europe is taking interest when Ukraine is not even a European Union (EU) member. What is the thread that links the USA, and the EU states in a conflict brewing between Ukraine and Russia? 

All these queries fall under the umbrella question of why Russia is stoking the fear of war with Ukraine.

Jus Ad Bellum

In international relations, it is a UN charter that governs the law concerning use of force among states. UN charter provides for absolute prohibition of any use of military force between or among states [Art. 2(4)]. The only exception to this absolute prohibition is the right to self-defence that states have under the UN charter (Art.51, UN Charter). Right to self-defence entails that if a state is attacked by another state(s), then there would be two consequences flowing from it; first is that victim state has individual or collective self-defence right (which means any state can use force against the aggressor state on behalf of victim state under right to collective self-defence). So, if State A is attacked by State Y, then all other states have the right to act in collective self-defence on behalf of the victim state but there is no obligation to exercise this right.

The second consequence is that it is the duty of the Security Council (UNSC) under the UN charter to take over the matter as soon as possible for future course of action against the aggressor state. Thus, the right to collective self-defence is limited and restricted till the time SC swings into action. The action by SC is described as Collective Security Mechanism, which is different from collective self-defence. 

The UN charter envisages two kinds of collective security system — first is UNSC, and second is regional arrangements of collective security mechanisms. The regional collective system would function within the umbrella of UNSC.

NATO As Collective Security Mechanism

NATO is one such arrangement made under the authorisation of the UN charter. NATO stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organization and is a treaty body. NATO treaty provides that an attack on the member state(s) would be considered an attack against all the member states, and all the states would be entitled to launch an attack of self-defence against the aggressor state. In order to make it more effective, NATO maintains a collective armed force as NATO force. 

NATO, when commenced, had 12 members in it altogether. Its membership now boasts of 30 independent countries mainly from Europe. The only country outside Europe is the USA. NATO therefore can be understood to be an alliance of armed forces of European states to protect each other from any armed attack or use of force from states not a member of NATO.

Russia And NATO

Russia views NATO as an alliance that endangers its security because it brings the USA into its direct confrontation on behalf of any European member country of NATO. The fear of Russia has aggravated over the period because of NATO expansion — an enlarged NATO has made many break-away European nations of erstwhile USSR its members. The present crisis has been fuelled by the rumours that Ukraine would be made party to NATO, like other states of Europe that declared independence from the USSR in 1990. 

An analogy of this fear could be understood by taking into cognisance Indian security concerns being compromised by a string of pearl doctrine of China, which encircles India and its neighborhood with Chinese military bases. Further, QUAD is perceived as a threat by China because it brings China into direct confrontation with the collective might of QUAD members and especially of the USA’s presence therein. Though QUAD has not yet been given the treaty structure like NATO, such arrangement cannot be ruled out as a possibility in the near future. 

The Catch-22 

Let me answer the question raised in the introduction. In normal circumstances, Ukraine is no match to Russian firepower and geopolitical might. In the absence of NATO membership of Ukraine, if Russia attacks, no other country is obliged to defend Ukraine. This was the reason that the Russians went away with annexation of the Crimean territory of Ukraine a few years ago, because there was no treaty obligation on any European States or on the USA to help Ukraine. Ever since, there has been an attempt to create binding legal obligations under international law for the European state in association with the USA. This is only possible through the membership of Ukraine to NATO. 

NATO is a collective system like UNSC, which compliments the UNSC because the action of UNSC under chapter VII of the UN charter is impossible, given the veto power of Russia (Art.27, UN Charter). 

Annexation of Crimea has already made European states jittery, and they don’t desire Russia to replicate a Crimea-like situation in the future. Therefore, the only guarantee to the international legal order of a nation-state as it exists in Europe and across the globe is NATO standing up to Russia for any future annexation of territory. Without NATO agreement, neither the US nor the European countries have any international obligation to take a collective action to match the might of Russia in Europe. 

Russia is wary of NATO for its security, and Europe is wary of Russia for theirs. Europe needs NATO to counter Russia to maintain the present world order and Russia’s interest in Ukraine not becoming a member of NATO. 

NATO brings the USA into direct confrontation with Russia. Thus it’s a catch-22 situation for Europe and Russia alike, which is the result of inherent distrust fomented by ideologies like democracy and communism.

The author is a PhD fellow at Hamburg University. He has written two books on financial laws.

[Disclaimer: The opinions, beliefs, and views expressed by the various authors and forum participants on this website are personal and do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and views of ABP News Network Pvt Ltd.]