The west’s agonising choices on Ukraine

A month after Russia’s invasion, parts of Ukraine are in ruins, nearly a quarter of its people forced from their homes and unimaginable atrocities have been committed in Mariupol, Kharkiv and elsewhere. Kyiv and its government remain uncaptured, however, thanks to the Ukrainian people’s remarkable resilience. And western democracies — as demonstrated by US president Joe Biden’s three-day visit to Europe last week for EU, Nato and G7 summits — have maintained their solidarity. That may explain the tentative signs emerging that Russia could scale back its military ambitions.

The longer the war goes on, the greater the risk for the west too. Allies have shown a remarkable resolve that has wrongfooted Moscow. Nato has been revitalised. Its Thursday summit took necessary steps to deter Russia from expanding the war beyond Ukraine, by agreeing to station four new battle groups in Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Bulgaria. Western allies are also continuing to send defensive weapons to Ukraine, facing down Russian threats to target arms convoys.

Democracies have also imposed sanctions that will take a significant economic toll. The Institute of International Finance now forecasts that, if fighting continues, official measures and “self-sanctioning” by foreign businesses could wipe out 15 years of Russian growth by the end of 2023.

Signs emerged this weekend, however, of splits over the west’s endgame in the crisis — and how and if Putin should be given an “off-ramp”. Some European allies distanced themselves from Biden’s off-the-cuff remark, at the end of a tough but otherwise carefully crafted speech in Warsaw, that “this man cannot remain in power”. While the White House later clarified the president’s comments and said regime change in Moscow was not US policy, such unguarded comments will cause unease among allies. They are likely to be seized on by Putin as confirming his narrative that the west is bent on crushing his regime.

The UK, though one of the most active suppliers of arms to Ukraine, signalled it thought it inadvisable to box in the Russian leader. Liz Truss, foreign secretary, said some sanctions on Russia could be lifted if Putin withdrew all forces from Ukraine and committed to “no further aggression”. Sanctions could “snap back” if Moscow engaged in new offensives. Such divergences hint at dilemmas ahead over any peace deal between Kyiv and Moscow.

Cracks have emerged too on whether to impose a complete European embargo on Russian oil and gas exports. Germany’s chancellor Olaf Scholz warned last week that this would trigger a sharp recession in Germany and across Europe. Biden offered to boost liquefied natural gas deliveries to the EU by 15 billion cubic metres this year, on top of 22 bcm last year. But that is only one-tenth of the 155 bcm of Russia provided.

Another potential faultline is over the level of military assistance to Ukraine and the question of direct intervention — especially should the Russian leader use weapons of mass destruction. Nato’s one “red line” had been to insist it would “defend every inch” of alliance territory if it came under Russian attack. Biden last week imposed another threshold, warning that the US and allies were ready to respond “in kind”, by which he meant with proportionate severity, if Moscow were to use chemical weapons.

Western allies have so far surprised even themselves with their solidarity. For the sake of Ukraine and European security, the hope must be that the unity achieved to date does not prove to be the high water mark.