In these strange times, two unusual things happened on the same day, last Thursday, October 6: one was a gathering of a wide range of European leaders in Prague, the capital of the Czech Republic. These included Liz Truss, the British Conservative prime minister who a month ago replaced Boris Johnson, her predecessor who “delivered” Brexit – the UK’s controversial decision to leave the EU.

 Many observers are surprised by how united Europe has become in the wake of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. But not every government has chosen to prioritize freedom, democracy and independence over its own interests. Hungary, for example, is heavily dependent on Russian gas, as are Bulgaria and Italy.

 Thus that summit – dubbed the European Political Community (EPC)- was the first ever meeting of the heads of the EU 27 member states and 17 non-members, symbolizing continental unity and sending a clear public message. It was also a grand show of solidarity for a continent facing multiple crises – from Putin’s war to energy shortages and a looming recession that has dashed hopes of strong recovery from the Covid pandemic.

 "We have very clearly displayed the unity of 44 European leaders in condemning Russian aggression and expressing support for Ukraine," French President Emmanuel Macron told a news conference. Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said: "This summit confirms that Russia is in complete isolation.”

 And Truss, who declared earlier this year while campaigning to become prime minister that the jury was out on whether Macron was a friend or foe, told reporters in Prague that the French president was indeed a friend of Britain.

 Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is certain to remain a focus of the new club as leaders of the embryonic EPC will meet next time in Moldova, Ukraine's small and troubled neighbour. Still, it is far from clear that a forum, that some have already dismissed as just another talking shop, has a robust or serious future.

 Its sheer size will be a major obstacle to delivering concrete policy, as will its political and cultural diversity and rivalries between many of its members, from Armenia and Azerbaijan to Greece and Turkey. These include Britain as well as Ukraine and Norway, along with the non-EU states of the western Balkans and along parts of Russia’s southern flank.

 The daunting list of challenges ranges from the war in Ukraine and relations with Russia, through the gas shortages and high prices facing Europe this winter, to the universal threat from climate change and the challenges of migration for a continent marked by struggling economies.

 The other big event last Thursday was Joe Biden warning in a speech that Putin’s “special military operation” might lead to Armageddon if he carried out his threat to use tactical nuclear or chemical or biological weapons. The US president made his most outspoken remarks to date about the threat of nuclear war, at a Democratic fundraiser in New York, saying it was the closest the world had come to nuclear catastrophe for sixty years. “We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban missile crisis,” he said.

 “We’ve got a guy I know fairly well,” Biden said, referring to the Russian president. “He’s not joking when he talks about potential use of tactical nuclear weapons or biological or chemical weapons because his military is, you might say, significantly underperforming.”

 Putin and his officials have repeatedly threatened to use Russia’s nuclear arsenal in an effort to deter the US and its allies from supporting Ukraine and helping it resist the invasion. One fear is that he could use a short range “tactical” nuclear weapon to try to stop Ukraine’s counter-offensive in its tracks and force Kyiv to negotiate and cede territory.

 The CIA and other US intelligence agencies believe that Putin has come to see defeat in Ukraine as an existential threat to his regime, which he associates with an existential threat to Russia, potentially justifying, according to his worldview, the use of nuclear weapons.

 If Russia did use a nuclear weapon, it would leave the US and its allies with the serious dilemma of how to respond, with most experts and former officials predicting that if Washington struck back militarily, it would most likely be with conventional weapons, to try to avert rapid escalation to an all-out nuclear war. But Biden said on Thursday: “I don’t think there’s any such thing as the ability to easily (use) a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon.”

 These two key events came just days after the Kremlin announced the annexation of four regions of eastern Ukraine following a vote which Putin called a referendum and the rest of the world dismissed as a sham. The longer the conflict rages and the more resources the Russian regime throws into the furnace of war, the more isolated Putin may become in his bid for nuclear escalation.

 Both these closely related events provided proof that as the world lives through these bizarre and frightening times, the like of which has not been seen since 1962, nothing is certain.
 

BY: IAN BLACK