A NATO Summit Confronting the Future of European Security

By Nina Bachkatov

Tensions have been steadily escalating in the lead-up to the NATO summit in Vilnius on 11-12 July. While both Washington and Brussels share the common objective of securing the European continent, which now includes Ukraine, and safeguarding the democratic world, they differ in their diplomatic, political, and financial approaches to achieve these goals. Furthermore, their perspectives diverge on China, a country positioning itself as the primary beneficiary of the deteriorating relations between EU institutions, European capitals, and Russia due to the latter’s invasion of Ukraine. This apprehensive climate has led to nuanced expressions through official statements, orchestrated leaks, and interviews. There is a concern that the outcomes of the summit will leave everyone dissatisfied.

Please continue reading page 2

Moldova, Another Headache for EU

By Nina Bachkatov

Since 1992, Moldova has remained largely overlooked by Westerners, confined to a realm of obscurity within Central Europe. Its borders, which have shifted throughout centuries, only gained attention after the collapse of the Soviet Union. With a population speaking Moldovan/Romanian and Russian, the latter also serving as the lingua franca for minorities, Moldova is widely regarded as the poorest country in Europe, with an estimated population of 2.2 to 2.5 million. Despite its peculiarities, it was in this very country that 47 European leaders, including the 27 EU members and 20 guests as diverse as the U.K., Turkey, and Andorra, convened on June 1 for the second meeting of the European Political Community (EPC). This gathering was marked by its symbolic significance on multiple fronts.

Please continue reading page 2

Zelensky’s Diplomatic Gamble: Seeking Support in a Divided World

By Nina Bachkatov

On May 26th, Mikhailo Podolzhak, a trusted aide to President Zelensky, stated during an interview with an Italian channel that the Ukrainian counter-offensive “has been underway for several days”. This statement supported the speculation that a summer counter-offensive had replaced the much-anticipated “spring counter-offensive.” The Ukrainian offensive began in early May with heavy shelling targeting Russian defense lines, border villages, and even infrastructures deeper into Russian territory. During this period, both sides engaged in an unprecedented use of drones, with reports of thousands of drones being deployed. These drones varied in size and sophistication, ranging from small, unsophisticated devices to more advanced ones. The drones not only inflicted casualties but also created an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty.

Please continue reading page 2

Still Waiting for the Ukrainian Counter-offensive

By Nina Bachkatov

For weeks, the late spring Ukrainian counter-offensive has the object of intense speculation as it has been in late September, when the fall of Kherson seemed to pave the way for a roll back of Russian troops. But the situation is different today. During the winter, the West has responded to president Zelensky’s requests for the delivery of sophisticated offensive and defensive weaponry, and trained thousands of Ukrainian soldiers to man them. In those conditions, Ukrainian forces should be able to succeed in a counter-offensive, providing their country with a strong position at the negotiation table. In the meantime, the West has been scouting the world, to find ammunitions compatible with Ukrainian guns, sometimes bidding against each other or using dubious intermediaries. The Ukrainian forces consume ammunitions in huge quantities, which means more of it before and after the counter-offensive’s start.

Please continue reading page 2

Crimea: the End of a Taboo

By Nina Bachkatov

The taboo concerning the fate of Crimea had just started to crumble, when the incident of 15 March involving a Russian fighter plane and an American unmanned drone put the Black Sea region under renewed international scrutiny – a region involving Ukrainian southern ports and the peninsula that Ukrainian forces want to regain. It was the first direct confrontation between two countries, Russia and the U.S., that are not technically at war which each other, but are actively involved on the dividing line about the European continent’s security. This kind of incident was due to happen in a region where Russians and the “allies of Ukraine” are testing the reactivity of each other in international airspace (or waters). In this case, the test concerned so-called “restricted zones”, unilaterally announced by Moscow in the framework of its invasion, extending Russian rights to occupied Ukrainian territories in 2014 and 2022.

Please continue reading page 2

Davos, G7, G20: Russia left aside

By Nina Bachkatov

The absence of the Russians at the Davos Forum has underlined the country’s isolation, and has been celebrated as such by the West. Earlier, members of the G7 and G20 had already been meeting without president Putin or Russian high-level officials. But it did not prevent Moscow’s dignitaries to crisscross the world to engage all those who do not believe in the Western declared goals. Lately, Westerners’ sources have begun to question the claims that Russia is an international pariah and that the world at large has some appetite for more sanctions. Hence the apparition of a new narrative, still a minority, according to which Russia is indeed isolated from the West, but not from the world.

Please continue reading page 2

Another year EU-Russia energy war

 By Nina Bachkatov

According to European leaders’, the sanctions against Russian energy producers and exporters have reached their goals – depleting Russian’s national budget, which depends for almost half from energy’s trade, and finances the war in Ukraine. They rejoice that those sanctions provided EU with an incitant to drastically reform its energy sector. But that leaves open the question concerning the intermediary period, which will start in early 2023, especially if the West is not backed by other countries. Despite pressures, a majority of states still refuse to join sanctions that might threat their national interests, and are not ready to threat Vladimir Putin as the pariah president of a failed state. They also see the present crisis as an opportunity to increase their shares of the global market and their geopolitical profiles, to diversify their investments and their industrial basis.

Please continue reading page 2