Paul
Goble
Staunton, January 26 – Because both
Vladimir Putin and the West have tried, albeit for radically different reasons,
to avoid saying that Russia has invaded Ukraine and that the two countries are
thus at war, many of the terms analysts and political leaders have used in
earlier conflicts need to be updated to take the features of “hybrid war” into
account.
In the past, if one country sent its
military forces into another country without the latter’s consent or without
the sanction of the international community, most people viewed that as a clear
cut case of aggression, an invasion, and an act of war. But if a country does
so with plausibly deniable units like Putin’s “little green men” in Crimea, the
issue is more complicated.
That is especially the case when the
country involved is a major nuclear power and when other countries want to
avoid having to face up to their responsibilities to a violation of the
international order in ways that could make cooperation on other issues more difficult
or lead to a wider war.
But states adjoining one like Russia
whose leader has now become adept at what is called “hybrid war” do not have
the luxury of avoiding facing up to the fact that Putin’s new kind of war
demands from them a new definition of invasion lest they fall victim at some
point by not taking action against it in a timely fashion.
Belarus has now taken that step. In
a January 10 redaction of its law about martial law that will go into effect
February 1, Mensk has adjusted its definition of invasion to fit what Putin has
been doing in Ukraine (pravo.by/main.aspx?guid=12551&p0=H11500244&p1=1&p5=0; summaries at unian.net/world/1036016-v-belarusi-poyavlenie-zelenyih-chelovechkov-teper-budet-schitatsya-vtorjeniem.html
and kasparov.ru/material.php?id=54C5E5D44843A).
The new Belarusian law specifies
that the appearance on the territory of military personnel even if they do not
wear uniforms or have designations of their membership in the military of
another state will from now on be considered by the Belarusian authorities as
one of the forms of attack which threaten the territorial integrity and
sovereignty of the country.
Thus, the appearance in Belarus of “little
green men” of the kind Moscow sent into Crimea will be viewed as an invasion to
which Mensk will have to respond.
The new law also specifies the
conditions that Mensk will view as a military threat sufficient for the introduction
of martial law. These include the concentration of military forces of another
state on the Belarusian border with a clear indication that that state intends
to use them for an attack on Belarus.
And it specifies that in the event
of such a threat or invasion, the government would be precluded from disbanding
either house of the parliament but would have the power to prohibit the collection
and dissemination of any information by Belarusians which might be of use to
the invader.
And the new law says that the
Belarusian government will have the power to require all males between 16 and
60 and all females between 16 and 55 to perform unpaid work for the defense of the
country or the overcoming of any destruction that might be visited upon it by
an invader of whatever kind.
Given Alyaksandr Lukashenka’s
reputation as “the last dictator in Europe,” an epithet that is clearly
problematic given Putin’s behavior of late, many will be inclined to dismiss
this new Belarusian measure as nothing more than yet another way the Belarusian
leader will use to tighten the screws on Belarusian society.
That he may do so is certainly
possible, but what he has done is more important than that. In an era when one
country can invade another by sending unacknowledged troops across its border, all
countries and alliances need to rethink what an invasion is – perhaps especially
those which are based on the principle that any invasion is a triggering event
for action.
No comments:
Post a Comment