The War Against Democracies: Drawing Europe’s new autocratic border
Russia’s threat to invade Ukraine is more than a Great Power play — its an action against the European Union
“Delegation and pooling of sovereignty… allows democratic polities to achieve policy goals together that none could realize alone.” Robert Keohane, Stephen Macedo, and Andrew Moravcsik, 2009
The obscure region between Germany and Russia is where Europe’s present and future are made. This is also the United State’s future because it is a region where military might and power play out. It is the region where democracy is won and lost. In the Twentieth century, it was the unsettled region that determined Europe’s — and the World’s Great Wars.
Every few decades the borders shifted from Finland down to Greece. From World War One, the collapse of aristocracy and the Habsburg Empire to the rise of Hitler and Anti-Semitism to the growth of Communism and the half-century of the Cold War. Russia massing its troops threatening to end democracy and peace in Europe is symbolic of this new period where democracy is threatened by Autocratic leaders. Eastern Europe will once again shape global affairs and draw the rest of Europe and the United States into a new power game.
The hard borders of the democratic states of Europe are buttressed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Within the NATO borders are many of the countries that joined the European Union. Some countries are founding members (Germany, France, Belgium) in a clear effort to stop great wars from raging on the continent again. Other members are the post-communist countries that were forced within the Soviet sphere of influence after World War Two. The 1945 Malta Conference divided Europe and gave the Soviet Union these countries.
After the collapse of Communism, starting in 1989, these countries were able to choose their alignment. This reflected both the individual struggles of literary, artistic, and social dissidents, and the everyday perseverance of every people living under Communist regimes who restrained individual liberties of travel, work, and consumption. The individual consumerist culture of the West was kept at bay.
The big expansion of the EU in 2004 and after, redrew Europe’s borders once more. This was a border that shifted from an Iron Curtain to a border of democracies. With this new border, democratic institutions were extended and brought to the borders of Belarus, Ukraine, and of course Russia. The European political system shifted Eastward.
Even before EU flags were raised next to the national flags of Eastern member states. NATO had expanded to the former Communist countries previously aligned with the Soviet Union through their own Warsaw Pact. In 1999, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland joined while in 2004 Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia became members. In later years, Albania, Croatia, Montenegro, and North Macedonia brought the Balkan countries into the western fold. The non-aligned countries of Finland and Sweden became active partners of NATO.
The eastward expansion of the EU and NATO are joint actions of democracies working to establish members embracing both democratic systems of governance, market economies, and a mutual defense system ensured through shared military strength. The EU fosters the political and economic cohesion of protecting individual liberties through market capitalism and a regulatory governance system that all members must respect and integrate into their national political, civil and economic DNA.
“Although the European Economic Community was established after the Second World War as part of a wider set of West European institutions designed to promote security, democracy, and prosperity, the organization’s mandate was to pursue these goals largely by economic integration.” Goldthau and Sitter, 2015
At the same time, NATO provides a security guarantee around the region and globally to ensure Europe remains in peace. The threat has changed over time, from the Soviet Union, terrorists in Afghanistan, to today’s Russia. Since the fall of Communism, all Europeans have prospered from peace and economic commerce facilitated by EU liberal economic actions and political free expression. So much so that,
“The transition from Communism to the market has not been easy, but Europe’s unprecedented generosity has paid off: the countries that have joined the EU have outperformed all the others, and not just because of access to Europe’s markets. Even more important was the institutional infrastructure, including the binding commitment to democracy and the vast array of laws and regulations that we too often take for granted.” -Joseph Stiglitz 2007
However, the acceptance of this EU ‘regulatory state’ and the economic and individual growth in wealth, for some politicians in these new Member States, was too much. In 2022, there are leaders and political parties in Poland and Hungary who are running counter to these democratic values that the EU is set to act against to ensure the democratic rules of law are respected. There are other countries too, that indicate erosion of democratic norms and the continued presence of corruption and lack of respect for pluralistic institutions, like the judiciary and the press. The weakness to fulfill and even eradication of democracy, within the EU, is one sign of new political borders in Europe — and the start of shifting order in Europe and the world.
From Democracy to Autocracy
The post-Cold War years seemed like a win for democracy and a bigger win for the United States — the sole global hegemonic power. Since then, a more concise and short description for the US can state that both her external actions in George Bush’s War on Terror and the torture of detainees, including those at CIA black sites in Eastern Europe (including in Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland), to the Trump presidency and more recently, the disgraceful withdrawal of the US (and NATO partners) from Afghanistan, are constantly shifting. All these actions point towards a failure of the US to emerge from the Cold War in a coherent political and social order able to build on their Cold War win. Without a clear and equal foe, the US is politically and morally lost. Clearly, the US is a weakened foe for any country wanting to challenge America’s democratic and even economic prowess. (Another reason why I wrote before about it being a Good Year to Invade Ukraine). The US itself is threatened within, just as the EU is, by leaders and voters who believe the institutions of democracy are not needed. Like independent courts, the press, and academic freedom. To name just a few formal and informal institutions civil society relies on to ensure their ability to express and recognize the rights of all citizens.
For Russia, under Putin’s leadership, the country is clearly a non-democracy that seeks to ensure its neighbors are also aligned with Moscow and non-democratic. The justification for invading Ukraine does not stem from the security threat NATO poses either in a Ukrainian membership or in other Eastern members. Rather, the threat is the soft expansion of EU democratic and economic liberalism to Ukraine and even Belarus. Lukashenko’s rejection and crack-down after the 2020 election, combined with the EU tilt of Georgia and Ukraine threatened the most Putin’s autocratic Russia. The severe crack-down on the political opposition and any civil society in Russia demonstrates the domestic suppression of democracy. An Autocratic Russia is threatened by any democratic norms infiltrating its own ‘near abroad.’
The region of instability
Clearly, a new era is emerging where autocrats are at the heels of democratic institutions. They seek to take them over and eliminate the checks and balances of democratic countries. While this can play out within the borders of the US or Hungary, in Eastern Europe this also plays with the borders of countries. The territorial integrity of Ukraine is already broken by the previous invasions of Russia into Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. Crimea may have been done for the military and nationalistic call of Crimea always being a part of Russia, but the action in Eastern Ukraine is to keep instability percolating at Europe’s borders.
A full invasion of Ukraine will bring this instability to the borders of the EU. It will stop the democratic eastward expansion of the EU and remove the buffer region of Belarus and Ukraine from the borders of NATO countries. Of course, Russia knows this, so rather than ensuring a greater degree of military security for Russia, the space is reduced between NATO countries and Russia. Providing ample opportunities to keep pressure and instability on NATO and the EU — and the countries within.
NATO won’t step over this new line and directly engage with Russia. Instead, the action will ensure the EU is unable to expand further east and the physical proximity to Russia is reduced. The democratic norms and institutions of free markets and civil society are blocked in Russia’s near abroad. The continued political presence of nationalist and autocratic political parties in Poland and Hungary only ensures Eastern Europe continues to buffer against the western democratic norms transparent and democratic institutions provide society. By turning the EU’s eastern region (and the Balkans) into questionable democracies the political and social reach of Brussels is reduced.
The wars of the twentieth century began over the territory and political systems of Eastern Europe. A period of peace since the early 1990s has descended on the region and brought economic and social prosperity in EU countries — and those still waiting to join. Political opportunism by national politicians and an assumption that western democracy and market capitalism was here to stay clouded any protection of Europe’s great democratic and economic experiment. This border region, where different economic, political, and social systems mix is once again the center of Europe’s instability. The cause and solution are — once again — not in military might, but in protecting and extending liberal democracy in Europe.
References:
Goldthau, Andreas, and Nick Sitter. “Soft Power with a Hard Edge: EU Policy Tools and Energy Security.” Review of International Political Economy 0, no. 0 (February 26, 2015): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2015.1008547.
Keohane, Robert O., Stephen Macedo, and Andrew Moravcsik. “Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism.” International Organization 63, no. 1 (January 2009): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818309090018.
Stiglitz, Joseph. “The EU’s Global Role.” The Guardian, March 29, 2007, sec. Opinion. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/mar/29/theeusglobalmission.
