Diplomacy and International Politics

Former US Ambassador to NATO and Bush administration State Department official Nicholas Burns accused President Donald Trump of a "dereliction of the basic duty to defend the country" for his apparent disinterest in Russia's meddling in the 2016 US election.

Nick Burns talks with CNN Today regarding Russian interference in elections in Europe and the U.S., and the lack of response from the Trump Administration to contain this threat. 

We are into the season when you will be flooded with articles and analyses on the 100-year anniversary of the Sykes-Picot agreement that was signed on May 18, 1916. That agreement between Great Britain and France, with Russian acquiescence, defined how they would divide the spoils of the crumbling Ottoman Empire in the East Mediterranean region.

"Regional actors will no doubt try to pass the buck and get Americans to do their fighting for them. U.S. leaders should reject such ploys politely but firmly and pass the buck right back. ISIS is not an existential threat to the United States, to Middle Eastern energy supplies, to Israel, or to any other vital U.S. interest, so U.S. military forces have no business being sent into harm's way to fight it."

"The agreement between Turkey and the United States on a yet-to-be-defined plan to establish a 60-mile-long zone in northern Syria adjacent to the frontier with Turkey anticipates that their troops, artillery, drones and jet fighters, working with selected Syrian rebels on the ground inside Syria, will keep the area free of “Islamic State” (IS) control. This move is at once decisive and dangerous. It positions two of the world’s and the region’s leading military powers, and NATO members, within half a dozen major local fighting forces of very different ideologies, and hundreds of smaller units with equally kaleidoscopic goals, identities and allegiances."

In this Boston Globe op-ed, Professor Burns writes about the tragedy of Boris Nemtsov's murder in Red Square and the need for the West to continue to shine a bright spotlight on the lack of freedom in Russia. He argues that the European and U.S. response to Russia's actions in Ukraine has been insufficient. In particular, Germany, the strongest European state, appears incapable of combining diplomacy and tougher measures effectively in its dealings with Russia. Professor Burns writes that it is timer for President Obama to lead a stronger Western response to Putin through greater economic sanctions against Russia, much more substantial financial aid to the Ukrainian government, the transfer of defensive arms to Kiev and a new move to station a strong contingent of NATO ground and air forces permanently on the territory of NATO allies Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Those forces will help to make credible to Putin NATO's Article V commitment to the security of the Baltic States.

In this article, Professor Burns illustrates all that Russian President Vladimir Putin has done to destabilize Eastern Ukraine during the past twelve months. He also makes the point that President Obama and Chancellor Merkel must now push back in three ways if the current cease-fire continues to unravel: 1) to agree on significantly stronger economic sanctions; 2) to provide much more substantial economic assistance to the Ukrainian government; and 3) to deliver lethal military assistance to the Ukrainian government.

This week's NATO Summit meeting in Wales will be among the most consequential in the Alliance's 65-year history. President Obama and Europe's leaders will contend with three major challenges.

First, they should agree on stronger sanctions against Russia following the move of Russian troops across the border into Ukraine during the last week. They should also agree to provide military equipment to the embattled Ukrainian government so that it can defend its country. Second, the European allies should agree to help the U.S. contain ISIS in Iraq and Syria. And, third, NATO should reconsider its decision to remove all combat forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2016. That will give the Taliban an open road to destabilize the new Afghan government.

These crises pose major challenges to this generation of NATO leaders. NATO will need strong American leadership, in particular, if it is to succeed in maintaining its status as the world's most powerful and effective alliance.

Nick Burns discusses why Putin's aggression in Ukraine matters to America's vital interests, and how the American and European response — weak, disjointed, and ineffective — has his colleagues around the world wondering, Where is American power and leadership when the world needs it most?.

Recent ethnic Russian demonstrations in Eastern Ukraine and fistfights in the Ukrainian parliament are more dramatic displays in the ongoing saga of a country unraveling. Furthermore, Putin's words--Crimea ibeing his last territorial demand--and actions--moving thousands of troops to to the Ukrainian border--aren't matching up.

Professor Burns writes about the need for a strong reponse from the U.S. and Europe. He suggests two options: imposing tough economic sanctions and moving NATO forces to the Baltics and Poland. Our allies, as well as Putin, are looking to see if Washington will display confidence, toughness, and leadership in the most serious security crisis in Europe since the Cold War’s end.