Politics and Governance

Kanwal Sibal on Modi's Untested Foreign Policy

India's former foreign secretary weighs in on the country's upcoming elections for the Daily Mail. He notes that while prime minister candidate Narendra Modi has a clear domestic economic and development agenda, his foreign policy goals on key issues such as India-Pakistan and India-U.S. relations are still unclear. 

Read the full story on the Daily Mail

Modi's Stance on Foreign Policy Remains a Mystery

Little interest has been shown domestically about possible new orientations in foreign policy under a Modi-led NDA government. Modi's single-minded focus on the development agenda has dominated political and media discourse, barring, of course, the 2002 Gujarat riots. The slowdown of the economy, the negative investor sentiment, price rise, corruption, the perceived lack of leadership have been issues of public concern, not foreign policy. 

Economic focus
For our foreign partners who see India's economic rise as opening up enormous prospects for their own economies by way of trade and investment and who are disappointed by India's lacklustre economic performance under UPA II because of slowdown of reforms, indecision and delays in implementation, Modi's economic agenda is alluring. But they are equally interested in assessing the possible differences in foreign policy between a possible Modi-led government and the UPA governments.Modi has been a state leader, with no stint in Delhi, and hence a relatively unknown entity for foreign interlocutors except those who have travelled to Gujarat for business reasons. 

Moreover, because he has been politically boycotted by western countries until recently for human rights reasons, the opportunities to assess him through personal contact have been that much less available.China and Japan, who have received him in their countries, have been wiser in this regard. Modi has not been grilled on foreign policy issues either by the opposition or the media. He has made some stray remarks on foreign affairs, but they should be seen more as obiter dicta rather than a considered judgment. 

His view, for instance, that the Ministry of External Affairs should focus on "trade treaties" rather than strategic issues may fit in with his "development" focus, but would get revised when faced with the reality of India's challenges once in power at the Centre.

If his meaning was that our missions should give priority to commercial/economic work, that would be unexceptionable in the context of economic performance increasingly determining a country's international role and influence. 

The economic argument should not be exaggerated though, as our most severe external challenges are driven not by economics but politics, relating to our territorial integrity, the threats to us from terrorism and religious extremism, the nuclear dangers emanating from nuclear collaboration between China and Pakistan which the West tolerates despite its readiness to take military action to stop proliferation in Pakistan's neighbourhood, and China's attempts to politically and strategically box us in the sub-continent while simultaneously eroding our influence there by its deep incursions into our neighbourhood. 

If China and Pakistan have been hostile to us for decades it is not on account of economic issues. India's role in the Indian Ocean has a major strategic aspect that goes beyond ensuring the safety of the sea lanes of communication for trade flows. 

Status Quo
How much the foreign policy of former Prime Minister Vajpayee, who enjoys an iconic status within and even without the BJP, will guide that of an hypothetical Modi-led government is a pertinent question. If Vajpayee's decision to take a plunge on the nuclear question was an act of strategic defiance, he was also a man of dialogue who made major overtures to US, China and Pakistan.

With a strong nuclear card in his hand, his strategy of building a relationship with the US "as a natural ally" made sense, as did his outreach to China to explore the possibility of resolving the border issue on a political basis. 

His conciliatory approach towards Pakistan, however, seemed based less on a cold power calculus and more on inchoate hopes and sentimentalism.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh built on Vajpayee's policy on all these fronts, pointing to the essential continuity of our foreign policy under governments of different political complexions. The 'Next Steps in the Strategic Partnership' under Vajpayee led to the nuclear deal under Manmohan Singh; the Special Representatives mechanism with China set up under Vajpayee has been the principal platform for political engagement with China on the vexed border issue under his successor; the obsession to have a dialogue with Pakistan under Vajpayee continued its confusing course after him. 

Is there a major course correction in foreign policy that a Modi-led NDA government would need to make? 

Tough stance
Not really, as our geo-political compulsions, our economic needs and our security calculus dictate our fundamental foreign policy choices, with limited wiggle room available. We need a stable relationship with all power centres. Despite the difficulties of dealing with the US, our economic and people-to-people links with it are of key importance. The US has treated Modi with gross political ineptitude, giving him, if he becomes Prime Minister, room to extract a price for engaging him, though it is clear that his relationship with Obama will be uncomfortable. 

China's Xi Jinping has already indicated his desire to visit India later this year. In visiting the Arunachal border with Tibet and vowing not to yield an inch of Indian territory, Modi has sent an important signal to Beijing. A visit to Tawang before Xi's visit would change our psychological equation with China by boosting national morale.

Towards Pakistan, one hopes, Modi will not be counseled to adopt a soft face in order to attenuate his anti-Muslim image, both at home and abroad. Pakistan will construe this as the "taming" of Modi without cost. Because uncertainties in Afghanistan and religious radicalisation sweeping Pakistan could aggravate India's terrorism problem, the new government should be in no hurry to resume the dialogue with Pakistan even if the bait of MFN is offered as a tactical move. 

Whether or not a Modi-led government changes the course of our foreign policy, because of the perception that he is strong and decisive leader will be a foreign policy force-multiplier in itself.

Photo Credit: Al Jazeera English

Latest Analysis, Statements and Positions on Crisis - March 25, 2014

EWI offers a daily situation report on Ukraine's unfolding crisis, featuring key developments and links to analytical pieces from foreign policy experts around the world.  

Key Developments

 

Government Statements

G7 statement – The Hague Declaration,” The White House, March 24, 2014

Readout of the Vice President’s Call with Romanian President Traian Basescu,” The White House, March 24, 2014

 

Articles

Anthony Faiola, “A ghost of World War II history haunts Ukraine’s standoff with Russia,” The Washington Post, March 25, 2014

Sarah Dutton, Jennifer De Pinto, Anthony Salvanto and Fred Backus, “Poll: Most say U.S. doesn’t have a responsibility in Ukraine,” CBS News, March 25, 2014

Olena Goncharova, “Parliament names new defense minister as Turchynov calls Russia’s takeover of Criema ‘our general tragedy’,” Kyiv Post, March 25, 2014

Jim Acosta, “U.S., other powers kick Russia out of G8,” CNN, March 24, 2014

Crimea crisis: Russia and Ukraine hold first meeting,” BBC News, March 24, 2014

Jonathan Weisman, “Aid Package for Ukraine Advances in the Senate,” The New York Times, March 24, 2014

Jeffrey Lewis, “The Ukes and Their Nukes – Why the Bomb wouldn’t have helped Kiev protect Crimea from Russia,” Foreign Policy, March 24, 2014

Stephen M. Walt, “Would You Die For That Country? – Why the United States needs to think twice before calling Ukraine an ally,” Foreign Policy, March 24, 2014

Ian Brzezinski, “Three ways NATO can bolster Ukraine’s security,” The Washington Post, March 24, 2014             

Elisabeth Brocking, “Monitoring Moscow’s Victory – Why International Monitors in Ukraine Benefits Russia, Not the West,” Foreign Affairs, March 24, 2014

_

Photo Credit: BiLK_Thorn

Latest Analysis, Statements and Positions on Crisis

EWI offers a daily situation report on Ukraine's unfolding crisis, featuring key developments and links to analytical pieces from foreign policy experts around the world.  

Key Developments

 

Government Statements

Statement from Russian Federal Drug Control Service on sanctions levied against Viktor Ivanov (in Russian)

 

Articles

Michael D. Shear, Alison Smale and David M. Herszenhorn, “Obama, in Europe, Says Allies ‘United’ on Ukraine,” The New York Times, March 24, 2014

Boriana Milanova and Victoria Butenko, “Ukraine orders Crimea troops withdrawal as Russia seizes naval base,” CNN, March 24, 2014

Lidia Kelly, “Russia politician proposes new division of Ukraine,” Reuters, March 24, 2014

Crimea may get special economic zone status – Medvedev,” The Voice of Russia, March 24, 2014

Andra Timu, Henry Meyer and Olga Tanas, “Russia Facing Recession as Sanctions Likely to Intensify,” Bloomberg, March 24, 2014

Ted Galen Carpenter, “Are the Baltic States Next?,” The National Interest, March 24, 2014

G7 leaders discuss Crimea crisis at The Hague,” EuroNews, March 24, 2014

Michael A. McFaul, “Confronting Putin’s Russia,” The New York Times, March 23, 2014

Matthew Rosenberg, “Breaking with the West, Afghan Leader Supports Russia’s Annexation of Crimea,” The New York Times, March 23, 2014

J. Dana Stuster, “Ukrainian Foreign Minister Says Chances of War Are ‘Growing,’” Foreign Policy, March 23, 2014

Scott Wilson, “Obama’s aim to shift U.S. foreign policy runs up against an old Cold War rival,” The Washington Post, March 23, 2014

Kathrin Hille, “Visa and MasterCard restart payments for Russian banks,” The Financial Times, March 23, 2014

James S. Robbins, “Would America Go to War with Russia?,” The National Interest, March 22, 2014

Sanctions destroy anti-trafficking cooperation with US-Russian drug agency,” RT, March 21, 2014

 

A New Tune from Serbia

Writing for New Europe, Public Policy and Communications Associate Dragan Stojanovski says the electoral victory of Aleksandar Vucic, leader of the Serbian Progressive Party, will inevitably change Serbia's political landscape. But Stojanovski warns, "whether this will be a change for the better remains to be seen." 

For the past year and a half, EU’s foreign policy chief spent hundreds of hours in weekly meetings with the prime ministers of Serbia and Kosovo, bringing together old foes to forge a historic normalization of relations between Serbia and its breakaway province-turned independent country. These talks were undoubtedly one of Ashton’s major successes since the EEAS was created five years ago, but they were far from relaxing afternoon tea parties. Tension and shouting were reported, but so were jokes, laughter and even serenading; all this, thanks to the quintessential Balkan charmer—Serbian outgoing Prime Minister Ivica Dacic. (Who knows, maybe there was even inappropriate touching involved? After all, Dominique Strauss-Kahn is an adviser to the Serbian government.) All this is about to change.

Dacic’s Socialist Party (the ex-communist, ex-Milosevic party) did well in this year’s elections—earning 15 percent of the votes, just as it did two years ago. In 2012, this result turned Dacic into a kingmaker in post-electoral coalition bargaining, bringing the Serbian Progressive Party to power and Dacic to the prime minister’s office. But Serbian voters have now declared Dacic redundant, backing the Serbian Progressive Party with 48 percent of votes—close to two-thirds of seats in the parliament.

Enter Aleksandar Vucic, the triumphant leader of the Progressives—Serbia’s unofficial, and soon to be official, Number One. He’s not much of a singer, he rarely smiles: picture Mad Men’s Pete Campbell paired with the poise and wisdom of Bert Cooper and the dark past of Don Draper. Throughout the nineties and up until five years ago, he was one of the most prominent figures of the Serbian Radical Party—extreme right, extreme nationalist and extremely involved in war crimes committed by Vojislav Seselj (current address: Hague War Crimes Tribunal). His role model at the time—Vladimir Putin; best friend: Jean-Marie Le Pen.

Today Vucic couldn’t be more different. His new role model: Angela Merkel. Vucic is determined to bring Serbia into the EU and he is committed to all necessary political and economic reforms to achieve this goal. This includes full normalization of relations with Kosovo, as well as good regional cooperation. For Ashton and other EU leaders, that sounds nicer than any serenade. Winston Churchill once said that the Balkans produces more history than can be consumed, and Serbia has a long reputation as Europe’s troublemaker (this year marks a century since the beginning of the First World War). This election season in Serbia, Kosovo and the EU were non-issues for the first time—and that produced a real sigh of relief.

Vucic’s new best friend: Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed of the UAE. Just a week before the elections, like a wish granted from Zayed’s magic lamp, UAE’s loan of one billion dollars (out of three billion promised for this year) arrived to help support Serbia’s troubled public finances. With unemployment at over 30 percent, roaring public debt at 65 percent of GDP and a supersized public sector, Serbia is in desperate need of structural reforms, investment and growth. (Money is so tight that the country had to withdraw from competing in this year’s Eurovision Song Contest.) Vucic is resolute again: bold, necessary and unpopular measures will be taken to steer the country to safe waters. Like his role model Merkel, Vucic is a big proponent of belt-tightening, but after 18 months in power, he has yet to deliver on what that will mean in practice.

Vucic’s electoral success and enviable popularity are a product of his fight against corruption. Just like their counterparts in Italy in the beginning of the 90s, Serbia’s political and business elites lived in perfect symbiosis until the global crisis. As money began to run out, Brussels started to call more and more often, asking uncomfortable questions about shady business practices. As a result, Vucic’s position has been a tough one—sometimes too tough. Arrests are announced before they happen and verdicts are made in loyal press outlets before the trials even begin.

All in the service of long-awaited justice, you may say. But for Vucic’s critics and Serbia’s almost non-existent opposition (the main opposition party won less than 6 percent of votes), this is a sign that, like in Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s Hungary, things are about to change. But whether this will be a change for the better remains to be seen.

For Catherine Ashton, the change is definitely a positive one. With things moving in the right direction in the Balkans, she’ll be able to free up her schedule for more-pressing meetings—how about some laughs and serenading around the negotiation tables on Iran, Syria or Crimea?

Photo credit: Secretary of Defense 

Crisis in Ukraine - March 21, 2014

EWI offers a daily situation report on Ukraine's unfolding crisis, featuring key developments and links to analytical pieces from foreign policy experts around the world.  

Key Developments

  • Ukraine has signed parts of the EU Association Agreement, which was rejected by former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in November of last year. The signed sections call for stronger political dialogue and security cooperation, but leave out measures dealing with trade, law enforcement, anticorruption and macroeconomics. The EU remains committed to the remainder of the package, which is likely to be signed by Ukraine after the presidential elections in May.
     
    • The EU has also announced that it will move up the deadlines for similar agreements with Georgia and Moldova, a move that will likely inflame tensions with Russia.
       
  • The European Union has increased pressure on Russia over its actions in Ukraine:
     
  • The Council of the European Union has imposed sanctions and travel bans on 12 additional individuals as a response to “actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.”
     
  • European leaders have canceled an EU-Russia summit planned for June and announced that meetings between Russia and individual countries will also be canceled.
     
  • EU leaders have warned that a separate EU monitoring mission will be sent to Ukraine if Russia continues to block the mission from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE);
     
  • Germany will suspend approval of all defense-related exports to Russia;
     
  • France has suspended "the majority of its military cooperation with Russia,” according to Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian.
     
  • Following unanimous passage in Russia’s upper house of Parliament, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed legislation to complete the annexation of Crimea.
     
  • Russia retaliated against further sanctions announced on Thursday by banning nine U.S. lawmakers from entering Russia, including Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) and three top Obama aides. A statement published on Russia’s Foreign Ministry website read: “We have warned repeatedly that using sanctions is a double-edged sword and will hit the United States back.”
     
  • Acting Ukrainian President Oleksandr Turchynov stated that there is a “real threat of invasion” from Russia, following interim Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk’s warning on Thursday that any move to claim further Ukrainian territory would trigger an “appropriate response,” including from the Ukrainian military.
     
  • Next week, President Obama will travel to Europe to meet with allies in the forums of the European Union, NATO, and Group of Seven industrialized nations (the G8 is no longer recognized, due to the exclusion of Russia from the group).
     
  • Ukraine will appeal to the United Nations to declare Crimea a demilitarized zone and take measures to remove Russian forces.

 

Government Statements

Official Journal of the European Union, implementing Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

Statement by President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy at the occasion of the signing ceremony of the political provisions of the Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine, March 21, 2014

Conclusions on Ukraine, Approved by the European Council, March 20, 2014

Letter -- Blocking Property of Additional Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine, From President Obama, March 20, 2014

Comment by the Information and Press Department of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs regarding the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, March 19, 2014

 

News Articles

Matthew Dalton, Laurence Norman, and Naftali Bendavid, “EU, Ukraine Sign Part of Economic Deal,” The Wall Street Journal, March 21, 2014

Carol E. Lee, Gregory L. White, Jared A. Favole, “U.S., Russia Trade Sanctions Over Crimea,” The Wall Street Journal, March 21, 2014

Jake Rudnitsky and Volodymyr Verbyany, “Putin’s Words No Solace as East Ukraine Braces for Storm,” BloombergBusinessweek, March 21, 2014

Timothy Heritage and Vladimir Soldatkin, “Putin looks to Asia as West threatens to isolate Russia,” Reuters, March 21, 2014

Andrew E. Kramer, “Ukraine Sets Deadline for Militias to Surrender Illegal Guns,” The New York Times, March 20, 2014

Alec Luhn, “Trade war over Crimea looms as Russia closes Ukrainian-owned sweet factory,” The Guardian, March 20, 2014

Roger Runningen, James G. Neuger and Gregory Viscusi, “Russia Pressed on Ukraine as EU Joins U.S. on Sanctions,” Bloomberg, March 21, 2014

Brett Wolf, “Banks must brace for Russia sanctions row, warn US industry officials,” Reuters, March 20, 2014

Shaun Walker, Alec Luhn, “Crimea crisis: US sanction list is who's who of Vladimir Putin's inner circle,” The Guardian, March 20, 2014

Steven Lee Meyers, Alan Cowell, and Andrew Higgins, “Putin Cool to Idea of Further Retaliation Over Sanctions,” The New York Times, March 21, 2014

Rick Gladstone, “Russia Hints at Using Iran Talks as Leverage,” The New York Times, March 20, 2014

 

Critical Terminology Foundations 2

EastWest Institute's new report presents a vital set of cyber terms, the result of a collaborative relationship between the institute and Moscow State University’s Information Security Institute. In this second-of-its-kind report, 20 new critical terms have been added to the international cyber “dictionary.” 

By doing so, this global team of science, technology, engineering and mathematics professionals continues to set the fundamental tenets of a common language within the cybersecurity domain. This bilateral collaboration began several years ago and produced Critical Terminology Foundations, the first report, which contained 40 terms and was released in 2011. 

Valery Yaschenko, senior vice-director of Lomonosov Moscow University’s Security Institute, explained, “Our goal is to avoid technical and scientific arguments and offer clear and useful ‘political’ definitions.” Plans are underway for this work to extend to Chinese, French, Hebrew and other languages. 

EWI Senior Vice President Bruce McConnell emphasized the importance of further cooperation with the Russian team and suggested they jointly explore other critical areas, such as critical infrastructure protection and the cyber arms race.

Click here to download full report: Critical Terminology Foundations 2

Crisis in Ukraine - March 20, 2014

EWI offers a daily situation report on Ukraine's unfolding crisis, featuring key developments and links to analytical pieces from foreign policy experts around the world.  

Key Developments

 

Government Statements

Barack Obama, “President Obama Statement on Russian Intervention in Ukraine,” C-SPAN, March 20, 2014

Ukraine-related designations – Specially Designated Nationals List Update,” U.S. Department of the Treasury, March 20, 2014

Remarks to the Press by Vice President Joe Biden, President Dalia Grybauskaite of Lithuania, and President Andris Berzins of Latvia,” The White House, March 19, 2014

 

Articles

Kimberly Marten, "Vladimir Putin: Ethnic Russian Nationalist," The Washington Post, March 19, 2014

Willy Englund and Kathy Lally, “Russian parliament moves to ratify Crimea takeover; Obama announces new sanctions,” The Washington Post, March 20, 2014

Janine Davidson, “Thinking the Unthinkable in Ukraine,” The National Interest, March 20, 2014

Humphrey Hawksley, “Ukraine crisis: Could Trans-Dniester be next?,” BBC News, March 20, 2014

Terrence McCoy, “Is Crimea part of Russia?  Ukraine?  Welcome to Wikipedia’s quandary,” The Washington Post, March 20, 2014

Ukrainian ultras put aside differences in demonstration of solidarity,” The Guardian, March 20, 2014

Gareth Evans, “The Ukraine Nuclear Delusion,” Project Syndicate, March 19, 2014

David Alexander and Krista Hughes, “U.S.-Russia sanctions rhetoric shakes companies, investors,” Reuters, March 19, 2014

Mark Landler, “With Russia, as With China, Unnerved U.S. Allies Seek Reassurances,” The New York Times, March 19, 2014

Job C. Henning and William Courtney, “Don’t Just Sanction Russia, Deter It,” The National Interest, March 18, 2014

Japan to impose sanctions on Russia for Crimea move,” Reuters, March 17, 2014

 

Afghanistan Reconnected: Linking Energy Supplies to Consumers in Asia

In Afghanistan Reconnected: Linking Energy Supplies to Consumers in Asia, EWI Fellow Danila Bochkarev proposes that a trans-Afghan “energy bridge” could ease the transition by bringing new investment and trading opportunities to Afghanistan.

Afghanistan’s social and political development is at a critical juncture—as NATO troops withdraw this year and elections are to occur next month. In Afghanistan Reconnected: Linking Energy Supplies to Consumers in Asia, EWI Fellow Danila Bochkarev proposes that a trans-Afghan “energy bridge” could ease the transition by bringing new investment and trading opportunities to Afghanistan.

Investing in connecting the rapidly industrialized-South Asia with the resource-rich Central Asia will raise Afghanistan’s living standards across the board, Bochkarev argues. Local and regional businesses will grow and new revenues will be generated. The energy-bridge approach will reconnect Afghanistan with its neighbors and help Kabul promote joint undertakings, including interconnections with Central Asia’s electricity grids and power generation projects. 

“Examples demonstrate that the benefits of the cross-border cooperation may outweigh political disagreements and intra-state disputes, especially if there is sufficient political will and a readily available framework for cooperation,” Bochkarev explained. “In recent years, energy cooperation in various conflict environments helped secure vibrant trade relations and significantly reduced existing tensions. This was the case in the Barents Sea region, the South Caucasus and in relations between Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan.”

Afghanistan Reconnected illustrates how this energy infrastructure would strengthen economic, political and social ties between Central Asia and South Asia and contribute to a more stable Afghanistan for years to come.

Click here for the full report: Afghanistan Reconnected 

_

Read an opinion piece on the report, on The Hill's Congress Blog.  

Crisis in Ukraine - March 19, 2014

EWI offers a daily situation report on Ukraine's unfolding crisis, featuring key developments and links to analytical pieces from foreign policy experts around the world.  

Key Developments

Government Statements

Vladimir Putin, “Address by President of the Russian Federation,” The Kremlin, March 18, 2014

Readout of the President’s Call with Chancellor Merkel of Germany,” The White House, March 18, 2014

Remarks to the Press by Vice President Joe Biden and President Toomas Ilves of Estonia,” The White House, March 18, 2014

Remarks to the Press by Vice President Joe Biden with President Bronislaw Komorowski of Poland,” The White House, March 18, 2014

Remarks to the Press by Vice President Joe Biden with Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland,” The White House, March 18, 2014

Jay Carney, “Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 3/18/2014,” The White House, March 18, 2014

NATO Secretary General in Washington to discuss Ukraine crisis, Wales summit,” NATO, March 18, 2014

 

Analytical Pieces

Matthew Sussex, “Russia-Crimea: Putin’s revanchism,” The Interpreter, March 19, 2014

Sam Roggeveen, “Crimea: Europe’s holiday from strategy is over,” The Interpreter, March 19, 2014

Michael Tomasky, “Three Questions for Ukraine Hawks,” The Daily Beast, March 19, 2014

Pawel Sweiboda, “Europe’s Eastward Evangelists: Why Poland Holds the Key to Ukraine’s Future,” Foreign Affairs, March 18, 2014

Dominique Arel, “Double-Talk: Why Ukrainians Fight Over Language,” Foreign Affairs, March 18, 2014

Jonathan Marcus, “Analysis: Russia’s Crimea move poses West huge questions,” BBC News, March 18, 2014

Hanna Kozlowska, “Russia Sanctions Fail to Soothe Poland’s Frayed Nerves,” Foreign Policy, March 18, 2014

Jamila Trindle and Keith Johnson, “Clean Slate?: Russia’s annexation of Crimea could wipe away billions of dollars of Ukrainian debt,” Foreign Policy, March 18, 2014

John Hudson, “Ukraine Warns of War as Russia Annexes Crimea,” Foreign Policy, March 18, 2014

Christopher Dickey, “Why Putin Did It,” The Daily Beast, March 18, 2014

David Ignatius, “What we learned in Crimea,” The Washington Post, March 18, 2014

Ulrike Lunacek, “PN Member Ulrike Lunacek in Favor of Special OSCE Mission for Crimea,” EastWest Institute, March 18, 2014

Jamie Dettmer, “Ukraine Expects U.S. Military If War With Russia Starts,” The Daily Beast, March 17, 2014

Samuel Charap and Keith Darden, “Russia’s unclear motives in Ukraine,” International Institute for Strategic Studies, March 3, 2014

 

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Politics and Governance