The Economist - UK (2022-03-19)

22 Britain TheEconomistMarch19th 2022

strategic autonomy—in part an effort to in­

sulate  their  defence  from  the  vagaries  of

American politics. But for Britain, this de­

fence  diplomacy  is  more  about  re­estab­

lishing its long­standing role as a military

power  on  nato’s  northern  flank,  at  the

same time as creating post­Brexit ties with

natural  allies  in  Europe.  “Most  jefcoun­

tries  are  smaller  nations  who  have  tradi­

tionally been very close to the uk, strongly

regretted  Brexit  for  that  reason,  and  have

been anxious to ensure its continued com­

mitment  to  their  security,”  says  Malcolm

Chalmers  of  the  Royal  United  Services  In­

stitute, a think­tank.

Russia’s  invasion  has  made  that  com­

mitment  more  important.  “We  all  agreed

that this had been a turning­point in...our

collective  security,  and  all  our  worst  fears

about Putin had come true,” says Mr John­

son. “All our illusions had been dispelled.”

On a visit to Kyiv weeks before Russia’s in­

vasion,  Mr  Johnson  told  Melinda  Sim­

mons,  Britain’s  ambassador  in  Ukraine,

that he thought Mr Putin would be “crazy”

to attack; that “he’s got to be bluffing”.

Mr Putin’s long essay on Russia and Uk­

raine last summer—“that 5,000­word turg­

athon”,  as  Mr  Johnson  describes  it—sug­

gests  that  he  grossly  miscalculated

Ukraine’s sense of nationhood and its will

to  resist.  Mr  Johnson  remembers  being

struck that “these people are definitely go­

ing  to  fight”,  as  he  weighed  up  the  Krem­

lin’s calculus, recalling an earlier trip to Ky­

iv  when  he  visited  a  bar  studded  with

machine  guns,  and  pictures  of  martyrs  at

Maidan  Nezalezhnosti,  or  Independence

Square, the focal point of the country’s rev­

olution against a pro­Russian president in

2014.  In  invading,  Mr  Putin  has  made  “an
      absolutely  catastrophic  mistake...worse
      than  a  crime,”  says  Mr  Johnson.  “We  ha­
      ven't  seen  anything  like  this  in  our  conti­
      nent for 80 years.”
      Despite initially doubting that Mr Putin
      would  take  such  a  calamitous  step,  Mr
      Johnson’s  government  moved  quickly  to
      arm  Ukraine,  long  before  other  major
      European powers were doing so. On Janu­
      ary 17th, even as French officials warned of
      Anglo­American “alarmism”, Britain began
      rushing  thousands  of  nlaw guided  mis­
      siles  to  Ukraine  (the  acronym  stands  for
      Next  Generation  Light  Anti­tank  Weap­
      ons). Around 4,000 have been delivered so
      far, at a total cost of £120m ($156m), accord­
      ing to the Sunday Times. Britain’s early de­
      liveries inspired other European nations to
      do the same, argues Mr Hurt. In the region,
      “ukcredibility  has  improved  hugely,”  he
      says.  Britons  are  supportive:  some  78%  of
      voters approve of sending arms and rations
      to Ukraine, and would back sending West­
      ern troops to aid its defence by 43% to 40%,
      according to Opinium, a pollster.
      Ukrainians offer even more resounding
      endorsement.  If  you  travel  through  their

country,  nlaws—and  their  handiwork,  in

the form of mangled Russian armour—are

ubiquitous. Ukrainian soldiers praise their

effectiveness  and  ease  of  use,  saying  that

they,  along  with  American­supplied  Jave­

lin  missiles,  might  have  made  the  differ­

ence  between  survival  and  defeat  in  the

war’s  first  weeks.  “We  hit  it  thanks  to  the

gifts from Her Majesty The Queen,” beams

one Ukrainian soldier, standing proudly in

front  of  the  carcass  of  a  Russian  tank,  its

turret blown off the hull by an nlaw. At a

wedding  of  two  soldiers  on  March  6th,

north­east  of  Kyiv,  a  guest,  Denys  Dem­

chenko,  a  47­year­old  actor,  clutched  an

nlaw as  he  watched  the  proceedings.

“They are one of the best and most impor­

tant weapons we have,” he explained.

The aim of this flow of arms is to drive

Mr  Putin  out  of  Ukraine.  “We  need  to  do

everything we can to ensure that he fails in

a catastrophic venture, does not succeed in

subjugating the people of Ukraine and that

he  withdraws  as  fast  as  possible—perma­

nently,”  says  Mr  Johnson.  He  plays  down

talk of “off­ramps, deals, ways out” for the

Russian president. “If you’re going to com­

pletely abrogate all the rules of civilised be­

haviour...thenyou’vegottofindyourown

wayoutofthat.”Britishofficialssaythat

theyarealsosendingadditionalJavelins

and Starstreak anti­aircraft missiles,

whichcanshootdownplanes7kmaway.

Britain’sresponsetothecrisishasnot

been uniformly smooth, however. The

Home Office’s initially fumbled plan to

dealwithrefugees bearsthesame hall­

marksofpooradministration,weakmin­

isterialleadershipandbadplanningasthe

ForeignOffice’sbotchedresponsetothe

fallofKabul.TheBritishsanctionsregime

hasimprovedaftera ropeystart.OnMarch

15ththegovernmentsaiditwouldplace

sanctionson 370 more Russianindivid­

uals,includingmorethan 50 oligarchsand

theirfamilieswitha combinednetworth

of £100bn. That brings the number of indi­

viduals  or  entities  put  under  sanctions

since Russia’s invasion to more than 1,000.

Yet a key test will be how well these are en­

forced.  One  expert  says  there  have  been

barely any sanctions­related prosecutions

in the past decade and at most half a dozen

fines, averaging a paltry £3m each.

As  Russia  intensifies  its  war,  Britain

and  its  allies  face  difficult  decisions  over

how far to go. Though Joe Biden, America’s

president, opposed a Polish bid to provide

old migjets to Ukraine, Western allies are

discussing  the  prospect  of  heavier  and

more powerful arms, including bigger sur­

face­to­air  missiles.  Nuclear  threats  are

“fundamentally  a  distraction”,  insists  Mr

Johnson. But asked whether he is willing to

intervene  directly  in  Ukraine  if  Mr  Putin

uses  chemical  weapons,  Mr  Johnson  is

more cautious. “It's very important that we

don't get locked into any kind of logic of di­

rect conflict between the West and Russia

because that’s how Putin wants to portray

it...as  a  fight  between  him  and  nato.  It

isn't.  This  is  about  the  Ukrainian  people

and their right to defend themselves.”

Mr  Johnson  concedes  that  Mr  Putin

may  have  a  greater  stomach  for  risk  than

the  West.  “In  any  situation  like  this,  typi­

cally,  the  most  ruthless  person  wins,”  he

says. “I don't think this is going to be such a

situation,  because  I  think  that  he's  fatally

underestimated  the  resolve  of  the  Ukrai­

nians and he's underestimated the resolve

and unity of the West.” On March 24th both

the  eu and  nato will  hold  summits  in

Brussels; those meetings are likely to heap

yet  more  economic  and  diplomatic  pres­

sure on the Russian president.

Whatever happens on the battlefield in

the  coming  weeks,  “there's  a  sense  in

which  Putin  has  already  failed,”  says  Mr

Johnson. Russia might “lay the urban cen­

tres  of  Ukraine  to  waste  and  claim  some

sort of Pyrrhic victory”. But “everybody can

see that whatever he does to the infrastruc­

ture or the buildings or the kindergartens

or  the  hospitals  of  Ukraine,  he  will  never

conquer the hearts of Ukrainian people.”n

Britain

Germany

Poland

Ukraine

Belarus

Finland

Sweden

Norway

Est.

Lat.

Lith.

Russia

CzechRep.

France

Iceland

Ireland

Romania

Neth.

Bel.

Lux.

Aust.Hung.

Slovakia

Denmark

Joint Expeditionary Force members

Illusions dispelled