Another cold war has begun

Developments in Ukraine are part of the after-shocks from the seismic collapse of the Soviet Union. The incorporation of the Baltic states into the EU and NATO, apart from the former east European countries, was the first important geo-political after-shock. The November 2004 to January 2005 Orange revolution in Ukraine was another far more geo-politically important aftershock, though it proved an aborted one. The current developments there are a continuation of the US/EU project of extending the political, economic and security frontiers of these two power centres into the heartland of the erstwhile Soviet Union. The objective is to geo-politically weaken Russia gravely and make its external periphery as insecure as possible.

The democratic principle and the lure of EU prosperity have been deployed as weapons in the Ukraine. It can be legitimately argued that Ukraine as an independent country should have freedom of choice with regard to its external affiliations. The US and EU are exploiting weak Ukranian national sentiment and serious divisions in the country, between the eastern part, which is rich, industrialised, orthodox and Russia oriented, and the western, which is relatively poor, agricultural, catholic and westward oriented, to advance their geo-political goals. President Putin's project of a Eurasian Union, in which Ukraine will be a crucial member, does not suit the West as it would help Russia consolidate its position in what remains of the former Soviet Union and enable it to deal with EU and NATO with a stronger hand.

One cold war ended and another has begun. The phobia of a strong Russia has not disappeared in the West. Beyond Ukraine, the target is a change of regime in Russia itself led by local pro-democracy and pro-European forces that are being bolstered by the West since long. Hence the systematic vilification of Putin personally as his strong leadership is seen as standing in the way of the change that the US and EU would like to happen in Russia so that they can exercise control over its politics and economics from within. The democracy and market economy cover is handy for bringing about regime change today in Ukraine and tomorrow in Russia itself.

Russia is right in saying that developments in Ukraine, to the extent that they are rooted in internal divisions, should be handled by the West and Russia through consultation rather than confrontation. Ukraine should not be confronted with an either/or choice between the EU and the Eurasian Union. While it is true that western Ukranians would prefer the EU option over the less attractive Eurasian option that would mean the domination of the Russian political and economic model, the eastern Russia-speaking Ukranians would want to preserve close ties with Russia. If the West can use the lure of economic prosperity to wean away Ukraine from Russia, it is surprising that the West should have objected to president Putin largesse in offering several billion dollars to the ousted Ukranian president Yanukovich to reject the Association Agreement with the EU.

In actual fact, the EU can hardly come to the rescue of the virtually bankrupt Ukranian state, given its own economic woes. The geo-politics of Germany is important here as the economic burden of supporting such a large state in demographic and physical terms would fall on it principally. The US/EU would actually want access to the eastern part of Ukraine and the Black Sea, which would endanger the Russian naval assets there.

Ukraine is headed for grave problems. The EU can hardly come to its rescue, and Russia will not if anti-Russian forces take power there, except that it will find its very difficult to neglect the plight of the country's Russian-speaking population. Russia may have to close its borders with Ukraine, entailing grave problems for the Ukranian people. A division of the country and a civil conflict is not unimaginable in these circumstances.

India cannot applaud the geo-political game that the US/EU are playing in Ukraine. The conduct of the US diplomats there has been egregious. Regime change policies through street violence backed by external interference threaten the global fabric of international relations and should not be countenanced by us.

The writer is a former foreign secretary of India