[ad_1]
In 1938 the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Neville Chamberlain, despite the obvious military advantage of Prague’s allies in the West, allowed Adolf Hitler to enter what was then Czechoslovakia: the Prime Minister simply decided that it was a “dispute in a distant country”. we do not know anything “.
Today, it is equally hard to believe that NATO decided to go to war because of its commitment to the far flank of Eastern Europe. Be that as it may, the Western Alliance accepted northern Macedonia on March 27, making it the newest and weakest member state. Such a NATO decision gives Russian President Vladimir Putin a wonderful opportunity to increase his influence and continue to successfully undermine NATO unity and test the strength of the bloc’s determination to defend its member at the first opportunity.
Northern Macedonia is the weak link in the Alliance and easy prey for the enemy. Surrounded by 2 million land. The country’s population has extremely weak political institutions and a very short history of independence. In 2018, the country spent only 1% of its defense budget. GDP: NATO recommends at least 2 percent. the country’s GDP is spent on defense, and only around 8 thousand. Soldiers There is great tension in the country between the Slavic Orthodox majority and the ethnic Albanian minority, the majority of whom are Muslims, making the state particularly vulnerable to foreign interference and provocation.
As for NATO members, only neighboring Albania has a lower GDP per capita and a higher level of corruption. According to The Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index, North Macedonia is a country with the least developed political culture.
Moscow has suspected NATO’s expansion into Eastern Europe since the 1990s. It was only in the early 21st century that the Russian army and economy were able to recover somewhat from the collapse of the Soviet Union and its aftermath, when the Russian President Vladimir Putin declared NATO expansion to the East a “direct threat” and openly attacked the Alliance. The Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008, coincidentally in a year in which NATO expressed the opinion that the country could become a member, prevented the bloc from expanding into the former Soviet Union.
© Sipa / Scanpix
Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014 and the annexation of the Crimean peninsula, while not an attack on a NATO member, further demonstrated the West’s helplessness in the face of the Russian threat.
Deeper in the north, Russia hosted a series of large-scale military games, which military experts considered to be simulations of cleverly disguised attacks on NATO members such as Poland and the Baltic states.
Now that North Macedonia has finally become part of NATO, Putin certainly does not intend to miss his first opportunity to demonstrate that the Alliance is just a paper tiger; in other words, it may appear threatening but not mordant.
In 2018, the Russian ambassador to northern Macedonia said that if NATO-Russia relations reached a new point of tension, northern Macedonia would become a legitimate target. There is just no “if”: Even before North Macedonia became a member of NATO, Russia had already done everything possible to make the situation in the region as tense as possible.
Moscow provided neighboring Serbia with S-400 anti-aircraft missiles, contributed to the coup d’état in Montenegro, incited religious divisions and attempted to destabilize the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
As for northern Macedonia, Moscow generously supported the so-called trolley factories operating there. The latter were involved in interfering in the US presidential election campaign. USA 2016 and spread disinformation. Russia tried to sway a 2018 referendum on NATO membership in northern Macedonia, the country’s embassy and consulates became a kind of intelligence gathering base, and propaganda was actively spread about Western plans to divide the country.
Of course, Russia’s attempts to intimidate NATO members in Eastern Europe in one way or another is a very old and no longer surprising story. Russia has been trying by all means to undermine the Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) which, after regaining their independence from the Soviet Union, joined NATO.
Today, all three have successfully become an integral part of the Alliance structures and the European economy, employing thousands of NATO troops. Eventually, the Baltic states became a poorly armed NATO front, and the Balkans unfortunately remain their weak point.
NATO’s position in northern Macedonia and its neighbor is very limited. Furthermore, the Balkan countries, which are much poorer and more ethnically divided, have much less European integration. Potential instability and a much lower probability of a vigorous western reaction make northern Macedonia and its neighbors a very attractive prey for Russian ambitions.
Based on the chapter in the history textbook already mentioned here, Putin suggests that most NATO capitals consider northern Macedonia to be a “distant country” inhabited by “people we know nothing about.” United States President Donald Trump, whose relationship with Putin continues to fail, only confirmed a similar suspicion in the case of neighboring Montenegro, when, in an interview with Fox News, NATO’s determination to defend the Balkans began to express themselves.
While the majority have been saddened or even hurt by such a declaration by the President of the United States, the problem is that Trump is speaking not only for himself but for many others.
According to a survey by the Pew Research Center in February, NATO welcomes less than half of the population in France, Spain, Turkey and Greece. Noting the crisis of confidence in the Alliance and its critics, French President Emmanuel Macron announced last year that NATO had suffered a “brain death”. Citizens of just three European countries, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Lithuania, are convinced that their country would have to react if Russia attacked a NATO member in Eastern Europe.
Not surprisingly, NATO’s position on the newest member is unclear. Although NATO has expanded the definition of a joint defense commitment, Article 5 of the Charter of the Alliance, to include cyber attacks in 2014, has not explained what this means. When asked what level of cyber attack against one of the Allies would elicit a response, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said only, “We will see.”
The 2018 Brussels Declaration also seemed to confirm NATO’s ambition to protect member states from unconventional threats, but only very vaguely stated that, in the event of a hybrid war, the Council could decide to activate Article Five. Of course, such Western evasions could not pass through the ears of the Kremlin.
Russia has better developed strategies to interfere in foreign affairs, such as attempts to cast doubt on the transparency and results of elections, incitement to ethnic tensions and provocations of aggressive conflict. All three options may lead to an intensification of NATO’s response under Article Five. The most challenging issue at the moment is how to ensure the smooth running of the upcoming elections in northern Macedonia, which have so far been postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to the latest data from the country’s public opinion polls, the pro-Russian nationalist party VMRO-DPMNE and pro-Western Social Democrats are vying for victory. Russia’s attempts to interfere with the electoral process or even determine its outcome not only threaten the sovereignty of northern Macedonia, but, if such intentions are successful, could result in the new government of northern Macedonia leaning towards Moscow.
Russia may also try to destabilize and pressure northern Macedonia in other ways, including through the region’s Moscow service client Serbia. Russia’s propaganda against northern Macedonia also includes conspiracy theories of a relatively large Albanian minority allegedly in conflict with NATO and Albania to make northern Macedonia a “cooler Albania”.
Anyone with at least some interest in the history of the Balkans is aware that this rhetoric has sparked outbreaks of aggression in the region. There is another possibility: Russia may start inciting internal conflicts in Serbia, whose highly volatile Presevo region borders directly on northern Macedonia, or return to the Kosovo conflict, which is no longer resolved. Any of these disturbances would also easily carry over into northern Macedonia.
NATO’s next steps in trying to ensure the security of its new member could be an attempt to apply the successful tactics it had already used when Montenegro joined the Alliance in 2017. A team of NATO-funded cybersecurity experts it has provided the Montenegrin authorities with all the technical assistance necessary to learn to recognize and repel the actions of a hybrid war.
NATO has patiently increased people’s interest in the Alliance and its benefits by working with government officials, civil society, local officials and the media. It has also made significant efforts to improve leadership in the Montenegrin defense sector.
The European Union, which has just started accession negotiations with northern Macedonia, could also take action and send a signal to the world that the Balkans are an important part of Europe.
More broadly, NATO needs a mechanism to respond to Russian aggression in the event that the Allies do not find common ground on the issue. Article 5 establishes that unanimity is required for the activation of the collective defense mechanism. The problem is that NATO members see Russia very differently.
One solution would be to form a coalition of NATO member states with sufficient defense potential and capable of confronting Russia and preparing a collective response to any attack.
Despite NATO’s overall military advantage, Russia can find its Achilles’ heel in the Balkans. The Alliance must urgently convey the message that it remains unbreakable and that northern Macedonia is an integral member of the Alliance. If NATO does not deal with its new members, such as northern Macedonia, there is a greater risk that, in the face of Russian aggression, both hybrid and conventional, it could mean nothing more than the end of NATO as a credible Alliance. .
[ad_2]
