One year has passed since Vladimir Putin’s Russia attacked Ukraine, plunging Europe into a war that has already claimed the lives of tens of thousands, and devastated a whole country. Putin expected Ukraine to fall into his lap within hours. It didn’t. It resisted heroically. He also expected Europe, the United States and the rest of the international community to give a muddled response, and for things to be back to business as usual within weeks. It did not happen. The response of Europe, the United States and similarly minded countries was fast, resolute and robust. Having grossly miscalculated, Putin had two choices: to admit his mistake and recalibrate, or, to persist, and to keep digging despite the fact that he was clearly in a hole. Most countries have internal corrective systems that in such situations keep leaders in check. In Russia no such systems exist. So Putin keeps digging himself into a hole by threatening to escalate. What has been clear from day one, is that this is not simply Ukraine’s war. Countries can have disputes, and sometimes they also go to war with each other. Usually the world stands by and tries to bring the belligerents to the negotiating table and to restore peace.

This week the European Union deployed its unarmed monitoring mission in Armenia with a mandate for two years.  EUMA -  EU Mission in Armenia - was formally established by a Council Decision on 23 January 2023. According to the EU, “through its deployment on the Armenian side of the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, it aims to contribute to stability in the border areas of Armenia, build confidence and human security in conflict affected areas, and ensure an environment conducive to the normalisation efforts between Armenia and Azerbaijan supported by the EU.” The decision to deploy a longer term mission is a bold step on the part of the EU. It is necessary and underpins the EU commitment to long term peace in the region. But it would be wrong not to mention that the mission is fraught with risks, which need to be managed.

The earthquake that hit Turkey and parts of Syria on 6 February was a massive tragedy. As of Thursday (16 February) it has left nearly fifty thousand people dead, many tens of thousands injured and millions affected directly or indirectly. The world rallied around the beleaguered communities, putting aside political differences and diplomatic obstacles. The impact of the earthquake on Turkey was enormous. Ten out of eighty one Turkish provinces were affected, and some Turkish towns were wiped away almost completely. Humanitarian aid started pouring into Turkey from every part of the world. The contribution of one small neighbouring country was particularly significant, not only as part of the humanitarian effort, but also for its political and diplomatic symbolism. Armenia and Turkey have had a difficult relationship for decades. The two neighbouring countries do not have diplomatic relations. Their borders are closed. Recent attempts to normalise relations appeared to be moving at very slow speed – both sides having to manoeuvre around many sensitive issues, and a heavy baggage of history. It took an earthquake to jolt relations out of decades of animosity.

For more than three decades after the collapse of the USSR the five Central Asia Republics continued to live largely in the shadow of Moscow.  Neighbouring China made headway, particularly in the economic sphere, largely with Moscow’s acquiescence, and there were a few moments when the west appeared to be making a mark on the region too, especially after the 9/11 attacks, when the US was allowed facilities to help with its invasion of Afghanistan. But this moment did not last long. On everything else that mattered, and for most of the time, Moscow continued to call the shots. The last five years have seen a seismic change in the region. A new generation of leaders are seeking better relations with the rest of the world: connectivity has become a buzzword, and there is a genuine effort to engage with the EU and the US, in most if not all the capitals. Ukraine, and the implications of the Russian invasion on future relations with all the post Soviet states, has focused minds, particularly in Tashkent and Astana.

The editorial team, associates and contributors at commonspace.eu extend their best wishes for the festive season to all our readers and subscribers around the world. Happy holidays!

The president of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), met in Moscow on Tuesday (11 October) with president Valdimir Putin of Russia. Putin warmly greeted his UAE guest at the Kostantinovsky Palace. The visit comes as Gulf states ponder about the new world order, Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the world order that had emerged at the end of the Cold War had clearly run out of steam. Russia and the West, instead of partners in the international system through membership of the G8, cooperation in space, and extensive arms control agreements, became first rivals, and, since February this year, enemies. China, whose rise over the last four decades as an economic power was first admired, has subsequently become a “systematic rival”. As it verges on superpower status it has become more assertive and less predictable. The US and its allies are seriously worried.  For the countries of the Gulf this new world order is uncharted waters. During the Cold War the Gulf was first a British lake, and later an American one. The American shield protected the Gulf states against intruders. When Iraq invaded Kuwait and occupied it in 1990, the US and its allies led the international community in a fightback, and Saddam Hussein was driven back across the border with a bloody nose. When he tried to rear his head again, the West finished him off. Then there was Iran. A huge American presence, with other allies in the wings, saw off Iranian ambitions in the region. It seemed that US-GCC relations were set in stone. Yet as the world reverted back to a multipolar state - the parameters of which are as yet undefined - it was only the naïve who thought that the GCC states will simply slide back to their old role of doing the USA's bidding in return for protection. Things in the Gulf have changed dramatically in the last six decades, and in the last decade in particular, in political terms the region is unrecognisable. In Abu Dhabi, Riyadh, Doha and elsewhere the national interest has been re-defined. 

Friday, 30 September 2022 will for a long time be remembered as a sad and dark day for Europe. This afternoon, at 15:00 (12:00 GMT) in the St George Hall of the Grand Kremlin Palace president Vladimir Putin will hold a signing ceremony annexing four more regions of Ukraine into the Russian Federation. The events in Europe in the 1930 are repeating themselves with an eerie familiarity: a big country invades a smaller neighbouring country, organises a sham referendum in parts or all of that country, after which it claims the moral authority to annex that territory or country.  In an act of cynicism late on Thursday, the Russian president signed two decrees recognising Zaporizhzhia and Kherson as independent territories. Their so called independence will last for only a few hours, before they are absorbed into Russia. The documents, shared on Russian state media, say the independence of the two regions is being recognised in accordance with international law and "enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations". However, UN Secretary General António Guterres has said any annexation of a country's territory based on the use of force violates the UN Charter and international law. Europeans thought that those times were over, and that the lessons had been learnt. Apparently not. Russia's invasion of Ukraine last February set the stage for what will take place in the Kremlin today. After votes in Luhansk and Donetsk in the east of Ukraine, and in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson in the south, Russia will annexe them, in defiance of the wish of the Ukrainian people and their legitimate government, and of most of the international community. It has already acted in this way once, when in 2014, in similar circumstances it occupiued and annexed Crimea. Today's events are being hailed as a victiory by the Kremlin. A stage has already been set up in Moscow's Red Square, with billboards proclaiming the four regions as part of Russia and a concert planned for the evening in celebration. Some Russians may decide to follow the misguided steps of their leaders, but for the rest of Europe today is a sad and dark day.

The president of Belarus, Alexandre Lukashenko, made a surprise appearance in Abkhazia on Wednesday (28 September), in a move that many see as being part of the Kremlin’s present strategy to further distabilise Eurasia to help achieve the ultimate aim, which is complete Russian hegemony on the post-Soviet Space. For sure, Lukashenko did not go to Sukhumi to have a last dip in the Black Sea before winter sets in. This was a calculated political move, typical of Lukashenko. So why did he go, and why now? Lukashenko has long been a tool of the Kremlin, not only when it comes to affairs in his own Belarus, but more broadly on the international stage. Yet he has also tried to cultivate the image of being independent-minded, not the sort to take orders from Vladimir Putin, but rather one that is able to influence the Kremlin and its policies. This visit proves that in fact he is simply a stooge.