On this week’s pod we talk to former Polish foreign minister (and defense minister and AEI scholar!) Radoslaw Sikorski. He’s now in the European Parliament and has some strong views on Putin, no-fly zones, what Europe can do, Poland’s bind and more.
If you’ve been following this week’s news, you’ve seen Ukraine holding on, with mounting civilian casualties - yes, but with undiminished will and determination. But you’ve also seen what can only be described (sorry kids) as an epic shitshow in Washington. The President finally caved to pressure to cut off Russian oil imports, but went begging to the Saudis and the regime in Venezuela to make up for the losses. Oh, and Team Biden also thought it would be a good time to finalize that great Iran nuclear deal with Tehran, because… more oil. Draw your own conclusions.
And while that mess was brewing, there were other incredible missteps. You’ve heard on the podcast that Ukraine is begging for the two dozen plus MiG aircrafts in Poland. Not unnaturally, if the Poles lose those planes, they want F-16s to backstop their defense. Makes sense. So, first, the Biden administration said no way, no backstop. Then SecState Tony Blinken went on the Sunday shows and said, eh, why not. Poland can do what it wants. The Polish PM was having none of it and accused the US of disseminating “fake news”, his words. Finally, the angry Poles announced they were transferring the MiGs to Ramstein Air Base for the US to transfer to the Ukrainians, if Biden wants. The mind boggles.
We’ve got the early bits of that MiG story on the pod, discussion about a no-fly zone, as well as ruminations about Putin, what Europe will do if America has to go and fight a war in the Pacific and lots more. It’s been a hell of a week. Let us know your thoughts, ideas, comments.
HIGHLIGHTS
Sikorski: Well, it looks like much of the propaganda of the last couple of decades about the Russian Army has been just that. Putin has exploited our mistakes in places like Syria. And he's exercised his troops in the Zapata exercises and a few others apparently with elite troops and small numbers. And the bulk of the Russian army seems to be very much post Soviet and pretty antiquated. Which, when you think about it is not that surprising because how can you have a modern military on the economy of Italy?
Sikorski: We made the same mistake as in the 1930s, some of us, namely, this man, like the then chancellor of Germany, was telling us very clearly what he intends to do. We just thought it was too nuts, and he can't mean it. Well, both of them did mean it. And so, let's just now take Putin at his word. And what he wants to do is to undo the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century, his words, which is the dissolution of the Soviet Union. He wants to have, around Russia, a group of vassal states so that he can posture as an equal to the European Union, to the United States and to China. He has made this very plain. And Ukraine, of course, is absolutely key to that effort because Ukraine plus Russia equals the Russian empire.
Sikorski: I think the paradigm has just shifted. And as you've seen, Germany has turned its policy by 180 degrees. Remember, the Germans had it knocked out of them in the 1940s. And the United States essentially ran Germany's security policy and, to a large extent, foreign policy as well. The Germans got comfortable with having just a trade and industrial policy. And we've been telling them that this is not good enough. But I think they got it now. And we have to help them make the transition. I would say that German rearmament needs to be put firmly in the framework either of NATO or, even better, of European defense, because of course, if they overdo it, then their own neighbors will start to get worried.
Sikorski: And as regards the energy, that's a job for the European Union. Remember, the EU started as a coal and steel community. And we are also a uranium union. The commission buys uranium from mining producing countries on behalf of member states, and then distributes the uranium. We could do the same with gas. We are the largest customer by far for Russian gas. And we could prevent Putin from doing these regatta of member states. We could say to him, look, the commission exclusively will negotiate these contracts. And the gas becomes property of the EU the moment it crosses the border in the pipeline. Then the roots of delivery becomes secondary. And then we get energy security, which is to say the surety of supply at a competitive price.
Sikorski: We are very lucky that in this crisis the United States is not involved in the Far East and was able to take leadership, particularly in this strategic communication of intelligence information. But I can imagine a time when the Chinese execute their plan for Taiwan, and the US is unable to come to Europe's assistance. Europe needs to have a plan B. And we need to get serious about European defense.
Sikorski: I have no privileged knowledge. But the latest here in Washington is that the US is thinking of supplying F16s to the NATO members so that they can release their MIGS to the Ukrainians. [Editor: Far from a done deal yet.] That, I think, would be a good solution. And as far as I know, Poland is ready to do that. The original plan was for the EU to finance the transfer. If a no fly zone is understood this way, then I think we can do it. The other thing that we could do, we've supplied them stingers. The Germans have promised 500. They haven't arrived yet. But we could supply also something more substantial because stingers are a short range weapon.
Sikorski: We've had a dispute with Turkey over their purchase of S400s from Russia. This is a weapon system that the Ukrainians probably could operate. How about resolving the problem, and for Turkey to supply that to Ukraine? And there are other similar systems so that we would deny the sky over Ukraine to the Russian air force. But I suspect they will soon stop flying anyway, because the stingers are taking down quite a few of the machines and they're becoming useless.
Sikorski: Imposing a no-fly zone against Russia over Ukraine is not a small matter. If you support it, you have to ask yourself whether if there are dog fights over Ukraine between NATO planes and Russian planes and some of them on either side get destroyed, and this goes to a war between NATO and Russia, are you prepared for that? Because shooting down the aircraft of another nation state is an act of war. So I think Putin is not doing himself any favors by indiscriminately bombing Kharkiv today, and other cities like Vinnytsia.
Sikorski: Well, you don't have a two war doctrine because you no longer have a two war capability, because you are not as rich, by comparison, with the rest of the world, as you once were. Others have risen and have created a power that would be difficult to match. Our briefings from the military committee of the European Union are that China is already at parity with you around Taiwan and, within 5 to 10 years, will have a local advantage. So the world has changed, but the US still has a military second to none by far.
Sikorski: The problem has been, I agree with you, in Europe, I was not a great admirer of President Trump, to say the least. And his national security advisor has just confirmed what I knew, that he intended to dissolve NATO, to take the United States out of NATO, which would've been a disaster. But he was right on one thing, namely, that Europeans were not spending enough on their own defense. This, I think, will now change. And we will become a more capable partner to the United States, at least in our own neighborhood, because president Putin has given everyone a good scare. And I think this post modernist nirvana, that some in Europe have lived in, has just ended.
Sikorski: We've been telling you for 15 years that capabilities should be where the threats are. NATO and, in particular, US forces have largely remained where they were during the Cold War. But there is no threat to Naples. There is no threat to Wiesbaden. There is no threat to the British Isles. The threat is on the Eastern flank. And I hope it's now just crystal clear to everyone. And Putin will, at least in this respect, achieve the opposite of what he wanted. He wanted NATO to withdraw from Central Europe. I hope, and I'm pretty certain, that NATO presence will now be beefed up in Central Europe because he's forced us into a position of greater vigilance.
Full transcript here.
SHOWNOTES
There are no shownotes this week. They will resume next week.