MOSCOW, 01 Jul 2021, RUSSTRAT Institute.
The British provocation in the territorial waters of Russia in Crimea is not just an attempt to create dangerous tension along the British-Russian line, but also a blow to the international security system.
Recall that on June 23, the Russian military fired a warning shot at the British destroyer HMS Defender (D36), which appeared in the area of Cape Fiolent. The Russian Defence Ministry regarded the actions of the destroyer as a gross violation of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and called on London to conduct a thorough investigation into the actions of the crew to prevent similar incidents in the future. British Ambassador Deborah Bronnert was summoned to Smolensk Square in connection with the incident.
The UK pretends that nothing terrible has happened, although the violation of the state border of one nuclear power by the military forces of another nuclear power can provoke a Third World War. At the same time, it is hard to believe that the British military coordinated their actions in Russian territorial waters with the NATO headquarters in Brussels and the leading members of the alliance. But it is not surprising that London was instantly supported by Kiev.
As the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Dmitry Kuleba promptly stated, Moscow’s legitimate actions are, it turns out, “clear proof of the Ukrainian position: Russia’s aggressive and provocative policy in the Black and Azov Seas, the occupation and militarisation of the Crimea pose a constant threat to Ukraine and its allies. That is why I emphasise that a qualitatively new interaction between NATO and Ukraine in the Black Sea is necessary.”
Thus, we can state the following. The United Kingdom, as a NATO member, together with Ukraine, which is not a member, are playing the North Atlantic Alliance for their own personal interests. The West, especially the NATO member countries, should think about this. Do they want London to continue putting them all at risk? And should the UK continue to remain part of the alliance?
First of all, this concerns Washington. The fact that the provocation of the British military occurred shortly after the meeting in Geneva between US Presidents Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin does not look like a coincidence. London is dissatisfied with the fact that the two leaders have started to reach agreements that can lead to the creation of channels for a systematic dialogue, including on defence and security issues. Therefore, the UK is opting for provocations to prevent Washington and Moscow from working constructively with each other. This is the first point.
Second point: in the current situation, London is actually behaving like Turkey, whose unilateral actions in Syria without warning its allies in the US and Europe caused the reaction of French President Emmanuel Macron in December 2019 and May 2021, who warned that Ankara was leading to the “brain death” of NATO.
The aggressive anti-Russian policy of the UK with the involvement of Kiev also cannot be acceptable for Germany, which is working with Paris and Moscow in the Normandy format on Ukraine. Moreover, according to The Financial Times, the other day German Chancellor Angela Merkel proposed to hold a meeting of EU leaders with Putin, which was supported by Macron. London is also torpedoing this initiative.
In fact, the United Kingdom aimed at repeating the effect of the Fulton speech, delivered by Winston Churchill on March 5, 1946 and gave the signal for the beginning of the cold war, which had every chance of developing into a hot one. By transferring, at first glance, the political primacy to Washington in building peace after the Second World War, London achieved the main thing for itself: it forced the Americans to consider the British as their main partner and prevented the US and Europe from negotiating with the Soviet Union.
It is in the interests of Washington, Berlin and Paris to prevent the intention of the “British-Ukrainian consortium” to repeat the scenario already tested by London in 1946. With regard to Kiev, NATO could establish a moratorium on the involvement of the Ukrainian military in any exercises or operations of the alliance for a period of at least five years, as well as stop the political dialogue between Kiev and NATO until Ukraine changes its anti-Russian course.
With regard to London – it is necessary to warn about the danger of unilateral actions against Russia without broad consultations with NATO member countries, suggesting that the UK should otherwise withdraw from the North Atlantic Alliance.