What are NATO’s Red Lines?

Russia's military activity in Crimea was an "eye-opening surprise" for NATO. This was said by General Jans-Lothar Domroese, Commander, NATO Allied Joint Force in Brussels, in his opening statement at a public lecture at the University of Tartu a few days ago.

"We were naïve,” Domroese frankly admitted, and averred that the annexation of Crimea constitutes a gross violation of the NATO-Russia partnership, which is legally based on the respect of sovereignty and independence of all European countries.

He also said: "Should our allies like Estonia be threatened, Americans will be here even before I come.”

[[{“type”:”media”,”view_mode”:”media_original”,”fid”:”2202″,”attributes”:{“alt”:”General Jans-Lothar Domroese”,”class”:”media-image”,”height”:”168″,”style”:”width: 143px; height: 80px; margin-right: 3px; margin-left: 3px; float: left;”,”typeof”:”foaf:Image”,”width”:”300″}}]]Domroese (pictured at left) mentioned two sources of legitimacy for NATO actions: UN Security Council resolutions and the concept of responsibility to protect (R2P). He recognized that the Kremlin tried to legitimize its operation in Crimea by a similar wording, referring to its protective character, but this rhetoric didn't resonate in the West.

He suggested that NATO hasn’t undertaken serious changes in its military plans in the aftermath of the Crimea events, partly because it is important to keep Russia engaged in the Western international agenda, which includes the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Iran issue, the conflict in Syria, North Korea, and other matters of concern.

Of course, NATO did sent a few additional military jets to the Baltic states, but this is not considered fundamentally important. In other words, the absorption of Crimea does not seem to be a red line for the Alliance. Where is NATO’s red line? All that we know at present is that no government in the West is willing to risk its money or lives for Ukraine.

[[{“type”:”media”,”view_mode”:”media_original”,”fid”:”2203″,”attributes”:{“alt”:””,”class”:”media-image”,”height”:”183″,”style”:”margin: 3px; width: 166px; height: 110px; float: left;”,”typeof”:”foaf:Image”,”width”:”276″}}]]It is not clear of the NATO-Ukraine staus going forward. Ukraine has had an “advanced partnership” with NATO but has not expressed the desire for membership. Elsewhere, NATO can continue its negotiations with Georgia toward the country’s Membership Action Plan (MAP), and there have been some talks from Sweden and Finland on joining the Alliance but both countries will need to hold domestic debates.

For now, we need to analyze closely the words and actions of two key people: Vladimir Putin and the new NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (pictured at left).