After months of bluster, brinkmanship and military build-up, there are warnings Russian troops could invade Ukraine in a matter of days.
Although the Kremlin has slammed the briefings coming out of Washington as “peak hysteria”, there there are more than 130,000 Russian troops on the Ukrainian border, regular military exercises, and an increasingly desperate tone to frequent diplomatic efforts between world leaders.
In Australia, the ripple effects of a war in Europe would be felt, no matter the distance between Kyiv and Canberra. In the near future, it could add a khaki tinge to the federal election campaign, much welcomed by a struggling, opportunistic government.
But it could also lead to a more unstable region, and create deeper, longer-term geostrategic challenges.
The early ripples
The standoff on the Ukrainian border is “the starkest piece of power politics since the end of the Cold War”, says Australian National University strategic studies Professor emeritus Hugh White.
But he doesn’t believe conflict is necessarily a foregone conclusion, despite the militarisation of the border. That’s because while it’s unclear what Russian President Vladimir Putin’s operational objectives from an invasion might be, he’s already scored a strategic victory by clarifying that Ukrainian entry into NATO was unacceptable. If an invasion fizzles, Putin won’t lose face, or influence in the region.
The Morrison government is already following the lead of American intelligence in preparing for a potential war. Yesterday Australia evacuated the final diplomatic staff from its embassy in Kyiv, with officials moving to the safer western city of Lviv. Prime Minister Scott Morrison accused Russia of “threatening and bullying” Ukraine, actions he deemed “completely unacceptable”.
The khaki election?
Unsurprisingly, the precarious situation in Ukraine has quickly become entangled in our election-focused domestic politics. Over recent weeks, Defence Minister Peter Dutton has repeatedly warned about the prospect of an invasion, and has used it, almost in the same breath, as an opportunity to paint Labor as weak on national security.
Dutton is leading the government’s attempts to make national security an election issue. He’s also trying to position himself as Morrison’s natural successor as Liberal leader. Expect him to frequently return to the subject of Ukraine as voters head to the polls.
UNSW Canberra international and political studies Professor Clinton Fernandes believes we are seeing an attempt to dial up the war rhetoric in the context of an election.
But it might not be all that effective. In recent years, Australia’s national security establishment has focused on the threat of China, so fears about Russia might not resonate all that much among voters.
“We’ve had a permanent press conference against China every day for the past three years. That ground hasn’t prepared with Russia,” he said.
A less stable region
The real implications of a Russian invasion could last well beyond the May election. China’s rise, and the US’ corresponding decline, means continuing strategic power rivalry in the Indo-Pacific is going to be an inevitable challenge for Australia over coming decades.
The standoff in Ukraine has kept the US refocused on Europe but, more importantly, it gives Beijing a clear signal about the American appetite for a future conflict over Taiwan. White says there are clear parallels between what Russia is seeking to do in eastern Europe and what China wants in the Indo-Pacific: both are trying to carve out an uncontested sphere of influence.
“The fact that the US ruled out from the outset the idea of using armed force in Ukraine sent a very significant signal about the future of an American-led global order,” White said.
That in turn could further embolden China, and accelerate American decline in our region. And given that Australia has for decades taken for granted eternal American primacy, that moment of geopolitical upheaval will be a tough one to swallow.
“Defence Minister Peter Dutton has repeatedly warned about the prospect of an invasion, and has used it, almost in the same breath, as an opportunity to paint Labor as weak on national security.”
And Frydenburg was going down the same road this morning on ABC RN Breakfast. It’s obvious the Coalition will keep up the barrage of lies about national security all the way to the election.
It’s really unhelpful that by convention all coverage of such issues (national security, law and order and so on) labels any views or policies that are extreme or hyperbolic as ‘strong’, and any views or policies that are more balanced or rational are labelled ‘weak’. The implication is that strong is always good and weak is always bad. Presumably if Dutton or some other minister declared war on China tomorrow his stance would be ‘very strong’. But would it be good for Australia’s national security?
Good point in that last para, Ratty.
I read somewhere recently where China is ‘frightened’ of Dutton becoming PM! I think it might have been Hartcher, but I was so busy laughing (and then crying) that I forgot to note the author.
Dutton, Morrison, and the LNP would LOVE a khaki flavour to this year – they have been trying with China, but this one may be an opportunity on a plate. But WHY? Little of our business for a start. Who’s to say Labor wouldn’t take any appropriate action necessary. Total bull….it that LNP make us any safer than Labor – probably just the opposite – as demonstrated by the stupid Payne calling out China on Covid before the rest of the world did. All it did was make us a specific target for trade sancitions and opprobrium. This people have zero idea of diplomacy – always just playing to their domestic uneducated backers . . .And without any subtlety at all.
I was told that Dutton called China on Covid before Payne did
Notwithstanding Trump and Brexit, most of us still recycle the same dated views from the same faded group of decision-makers, reporters and functionaries. Deterred from fixed ideas and closed minds by neither reality nor criticism, those who decide the news and mould the decisions see the world and certainly adversarial elements of it like Russia through the same customary narrow, reactionary and sectarian bent.
Contemporary events should be seen in the light of long-standing dogmas. On the one hand, we have the deeply anti-Russian sentiment of the NATO/shadowland/ex-Comecon countries, plus the skilful Western psychological manipulation of Eastern protest groups. On the other, a Russia with good reason to distrust the motives of the West and therefore to enforce a chain of friendly States.
As always, even after a disconcerting Trump victory, commentators continue to write their articles according to their colleague’s views and Soviet-era orthodoxies. Their Russia is a Western parody, just as the West’s Muslim is whatever the haters want it to be, preferably worse.
NATO/U.S. ruling class seeks its customary overthrow of any independent Russian government then its replacement by a West-subservient client state – a structure very much at odds with the reality that for centuries Russia/USSR has been what it remains – a key player in European affairs.
Seeing Russia as irreversibly hostile to the West is quite deliberate. It excuses Western bellicosity, militarism, and gratuitous violence. Our ruling clique is utterly disinterested in recognising present-day Russian security concerns; indeed by virtue of “our” belief in “our” sanctity, “we” do not even accept that present-day Russia should have security concerns.
Perfect exposition, I’ve little to add.
Isn’t the eastern part of the Ukraine 70% Russian speaking? Also the Crimea was alwys part of Russia but Krushchev, when he ran the Politburo, ceded It to the Ukraine.The said Nikita, by the way was an ethnic Ukrainian.
Are you saying that speaking Russian makes one a Russian?
No, but it is pretty clear what the wishes of the people of Crimea were in 1991 and again in 2014.
And WW2 when they initially greeted the NAZI’s as liberators. Stalin starved the Ukrainian people and was loathed by them; millions died due yo starvation long before Hitler’d minions arrived.
Stop spreading rubbish, more people die in Volga region of Russia during that period, Stalin did not discriminate on nationality basis. People of western Ukraine were greeting Germans.
See Helen ‘Demidenko’ Dale’s opus, which won adulatory kudos & awards from the bien pissants – until it didn’t.
Dutton and Scomo are going to STAND UP TO THE BULLY! I’m sure that the bully will cower and withdraw into a fetal position, not to ever try THAT again!
Seriously, I am not aware of any serious attempt at intelligent, pragmatic negotiations with the Russians. All we hear is hysterical talk about invasions and so little about addressing the fact that Russia does not like the idea of NATO on its doorstep.
Politicians should be sent into the front ranks to experience what they sow. I suggest that a Tattslotto system be sat up and ALL members that support a military response have one of their own march off for an imbedded experience until hostilities end. It’s only fair – right?