In Geopolitics Today - Wednesday, June 9th
The perils of NATO Membership Action Plans for Ukraine and Georgia, the growth of South Korean missile capabilities, and Hungary’s Orbán takes a swipe at Germany
The Perils of NATO Membership Action Plans for Ukraine and Georgia
When Russia deployed roughly 100,000 troops to the Ukrainian border earlier this year, the move alarmed policymakers in Europe and the United States, who broadly condemned the military build-up as another form of Russian aggression. But there is more to the story than just a clear-eyed view of an aggressor and a victim. It would be prudent to examine exactly why Russia chose to mobilise such a vast force at its border with neither the intention to commit to exercises or an outright invasion.
Ukraine, it appears, is something of a red line for Russia, as Russia’s foreign ministry spokesperson made clear when he warned that NATO membership for Ukraine could entail “irreversible consequences for the Ukrainian statehood.” In an address to the nation shortly thereafter, President Vladimir Putin made sure to caution the EU and US about crossing Russia’s red lines.
As Henrik B. L. Larsen writing for War on the Rocks points out, Russia may have been merely flexing its military muscles in order to prevent an attempt by Ukraine to draw closer to the reality of full NATO membership. Preventing Ukraine, as well as Georgia, from joining NATO is among Russia’s key geopolitical objectives, and one that the Russian state is likely willing to use military force to achieve.
With a more prudent view than we are used to reading, Larsen takes the position that extending full-fledged security commitments to Ukraine and Georgia would overstretch NATO requirements beyond any degree of realism. Further, he notes that combat troops are neither trained nor structured to be in any position to effectively fight in gray-zone operations, which are below the threshold of NATO’s collective defence obligations. Finally, he asserts that accepting Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, at a time when NATO is unable to adequately support these countries, would inevitably expose enlargement as a “gigantic bluff” that would tarnish NATO’s credibility as a defence alliance thereafter.
Read more about this story here.
The Growth of South Korean Missile Capabilities
In a recent post I discussed the recent summit meeting between U.S. President Joe Biden and South Korean President Moon Jae-in, and how the alliance may have some divergences in economic interests. But politically and militarily, the picture is entirely different.
The summit saw the two countries commit to enhanced cooperation in a number of areas, but most significant for our purposes was the removal of restrictions on South Korea’s missile program. South Korea can now make missiles to reach anywhere it wants. This change in policy means that within a few years, South Korea may be capable of striking targets beyond North Korea, including China and Russia.
While the decision may lead to a potential arms race on the Korean Peninsula, it enables South Korea to more effectively deter against adversaries. That gives enough reason, argues Eli Fuhrman writing for 19fortyfive, for the US to stop subsidizing South Korea’s defence.
South Korea’s Hyunmoo series of missiles are the other mainstay of South Korea’s missile arsenal. In March last year, South Korea pushed its missile development further than before as it conducted a test of the Hyunmoo-4 ballistic missile, which is said to be capable of carrying a large payload and of reaching targets up to 800 km away.
Read more about this story here.
Hungary’s Orbán Takes a Swipe at Germany and Doubles Down on Support for China
Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has openly taunted Germany by claiming that the European left, following the lead of leftists in Germany, is attacking Hungary in a ‘contemptible manner.' Orbán has been a persistent thorn in the side of those in the European Bureaucracy who firmly support a transatlantic partnership to be the bedrock of European security. And for years Orbán has wielded an ability to veto any unified EU response, and this has been particularly the case when it comes to European declarations on China and Hong Kong.
The German frustration largely stems from Hungary’s repeated uses of its veto powers, thereby preventing a unified voice on matters such as China. German State Secretary at the Foreign Ministry, Miguel Berger, tweeted about his frustrations with Orbán while urging EU member states to undertake a serious debate on reforming the EU’s foreign policy mechanisms.
But Hungary’s defiance is not entirely disconnected from reality. At a time when the US is applying immense pressure on the EU and its constituent member states to more closely align with its tough stance on China, Hungary’s position as the problem child of Europe serves as an example for dissenting voices in the broader EU structure. In the view of Orbán, political declarations condemning China for human rights violations in Hong Kong or Xinjiang are little more than words on a piece of paper, a reckless policy that will lead to a new Cold War. As Orbán himself notes:
A resumption of the Cold War is […] contrary to the interests of Europe, Central Europe and Hungary. We need development, green development and digital development. We need cooperation, investment, trade and cultural and scientific relations – not boycotts, sanctions, sermons and lectures.
He goes on to further clarify his government’s position on the matter going forward:
Hungary will continue to do its utmost in order to develop international cooperation. We will exercise our rights guaranteed by the European Union’s founding treaties, we will act in accordance with the principle of loyal cooperation, and we will work to restore Europe’s influence and authority in foreign policy. We will support initiatives to develop Europe’s strategic sovereignty and autonomy. To do this, we must first curb the European left’s deranged adventures in foreign policy.
Read more about this story here.