THE STATE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Reforming Europe in a time of war

THE STATE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 76 because defeating Russia, in the terms that the Ukrainian (and other European) governments would like, is highly improbable. Regarding NATO and the European Union, it was clear from the outset that they were not going to con- done Russia’s attack but nor would they get involved in a direct confrontation with the world’s greatest nuclear power.Their strategy has consisted of backing up Ukraine - sending weapons, economic support, military intelli- gence, consultancy and cyber-capability - and weakening Russia by means of financial, economic, commercial and personal sanctions, providing as many as six successive packages as the war has gone on. The first of these lines of action was remarkably successful and has allowed Ukraine to resist the Russian attack so far, although los- ing significant land. The second has been less effective so far. Russia has stood up better than might have been expected to the unprecedented toughWestern sanctions, and it has been kept afloat with exceptional measures and support from other countries, fundamentally China, in financial aspects, and by attempting to diversify its imports and exports, although with limited results as yet. After an initial crash, the rouble is now stronger than it has been over the last few years and its reserves are in- creasing as the price of fuel goes up, despite the western blockade. Economic analysts believe that both inflation, close to 17%, and the drop in the Gross Domestic Prod- uct, close to 10%, will become more moderate. However, unemployment is rising significantly, and the shortage of technological components is a tough setback for many Russian businesses, including the arms industry and other essential equipment for warfare. As might be expected, the sanctions have rebounded on the countries that imposed them, particularly in Eu- rope. The inevitable rise in fuel costs, plus certain supply chain issues, have made inflation rocket and caused a rise in interest rates at the central banks that is going to come down hard on economies, particularly the weakest. European countries have tried to free themselves from dependency on Russian fossil fuels - basically gas, as coal and oil can be obtained elsewhere, but they need time, If Russia cuts off its gas supply, many countries will fall into a recession, including Germany, that will bring down all the other EU countries with it. Furthermore, a problem has occurred with exporting Ukrainian and Russian grain, and fertilizers from the lat- ter, that might cause an unprecedented famine in some countries, particularly in Africa, although it does seem that this issue is being resolved. Here, the problem is that theWestern countries could not convince the victims that Russia was the guilty party in the food crisis, as most of these countries blamed the sanctions. In short, the Western strategy consisted of causing economic collapse in Russia, which would prevent it from carrying on with the war and, if possible, would bring about a social and political crisis that would topple the current regime. It is not easy for this to happen, at least in the medium term, as the Russian population is used to holding out under precarious conditions while it is also fed partial information and official propaganda from the regime. On the contrary, it is more likely that the Western population - living in a democracy - will make its discontent felt as living con- ditions worsen, and this will detonate political crises. This strategy is thereby becoming a sort of stand-off to see who can outlast the other and this has a random or uncertain component, which is not welcome in a solid, well-founded strategy. Finally, the last essential aspect of a strategy - as well as setting clear and realistic objectives - is to know how to finish the action, in the case of both success and failure. Generally, only when one of the contenders - or both - realises that it is not feasible to meet their pro- posed objectives are they ready for peace. While both believe that victory is within their grasp, the chances of negotiation are drastically reduced. This is what is currently happening in the war in Ukraine and makes us think that objective-setting and planning has not been ideal on either side. Prolonging the war without any chance of a decisive victory for either side makes no sense at all.