Gustavo de Arístegui: "With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, one cannot be neutral"
In the latest edition of "De Cara al Mundo", Onda Madrid's radio programme, we had the participation of Gustavo de Arístegui, diplomat and international analyst, who spoke about the conflict in Ukraine after the Russian offensive in Severodonetsk, in the Donbas region. On the other hand, the Spanish diplomat analysed the role that NATO is playing in the war and Turkey's actions following its veto of Finland and Sweden as full members of NATO.
Is it true that we are at a time when it is impossible to be neutral?
It is very difficult to be neutral at this time. However, I would like to say that, in the light of Finland and Sweden's approval of full NATO membership, they have been militarily non-aligned but hardly neutral for many years. Readers should also be told, since many people think that neutral countries are pacifist countries, that many neutral countries have formidable armies, extraordinary armed forces and spend much more of their GDP on defence, more even than NATO member countries and certainly more than Spain. For example, let us remember that the Prime Minister of Finland and the President of Finland announced very recently, even before announcing their interest in joining NATO, that they wanted to buy F-35 fighter jets, the most modern sixth-generation aircraft currently available only to strategic allies of the United States - we know that the most advanced is the F-22 and that it is not sold outside the United States. Sweden is a technological and military power of the first order and has an air force larger than that of Spain, being a country five times smaller in population, it has an extraordinary military industry, let us remember that one of the most effective anti-tank weapons being used in the war in Ukraine against Russian tanks are precisely those of Swedish manufacture. By this I mean that, in the face of a brutal aggression such as the one Ukraine is suffering, there can be no half-measures and no attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
The world's institutions must take a firm stance against the aggressor...
There are world institutions that have shown a flagrant, unjustifiable and clearly outrageous inoperativeness, an equidistance at the beginning of the conflict that was very irritating. The very fact that Russia attacked Kiev when the UN Secretary General was in Ukraine visiting President Zelenski is a frontal attack on everything that the post-World War II system of global security and balance entails. Of course, those who say that fuelling the conflict in Ukraine and arming the Ukrainians in its defence only risks the conflict spilling over are completely wrong. If Russia is not stopped, other countries in Ukraine will be victims - it could be the Baltic nations, it could be Finland, Sweden, Moldova, certainly Georgia, but it could be anyone.
Will the European Union and NATO be able to maintain their unity, on the one hand, because of political issues, I am thinking of Hungary or Turkey, but also because of issues such as the impact of sanctions?
It is an extraordinarily pertinent question, as far as sanctions are concerned, the approach to the oil and gas embargo by different countries worries me extraordinarily, from the most lax, Germany and Italy, to the most rigid and firm, Finland, Sweden and Poland, there is a serious discrepancy, then, of course, there are the undisguised sympathies that Viktor Orbán has for Putin and what this means. Similarly, I believe that Russia's aggression against Ukraine is in some way a brake on certain populisms, both those of the extreme right and those of the extreme left, the fact that they are all so close to Putin, whether Catalan nationalism, the Spanish extreme left or the European extreme right, are being profoundly discredited by this very closeness to the Russian satrap. As for the unity of NATO, which is something different from the unity of the European Union, I believe that NATO is showing commendable firmness, it has found its role, it was clear that NATO was absolutely essential, what would we be doing today if we had listened to those absolutely irresponsible voices, starting with Fukuyama himself with his terrible book 'The End of History and the Last Man' when he said that we had to take advantage of the paths of peace because there was no longer any conflict that needed large armies or the Atlantic Alliance.
Turkey's role within the Alliance, where in addition to vetoing Finland and Sweden, it has announced an incursion into Syria, only strains international relations....
This is worrying for several reasons, the first being that Turkey has become an almost foreign element in the Atlantic Alliance. We cannot forget that it played a decisive role during the Cold War and when one looks at the development of this conflict one understands perfectly well the Turkish role in the current conflict and in others. In the case of the Russia-Ukraine war, Turkey, despite its historic relations with Russia, announced that it was closing the Bosphorus and Dardanelles Straits to Russian warships and submarines, which severely limited Russia's operational capacity in the Black Sea. The demands being made by Turkey can hopefully be dropped because many of them are domestic political issues, I am not going to say that the PKK has not committed terrorist acts, it has obviously been on the list of terrorist organisations for a long time. However, there are organisations close to the PKK, such as the Kurdish Self-Defence and Self-Help Forces, which have been absolutely decisive in the defeat of Al-Qaeda and Daesh and the normalisation of certain areas where terror reigned in an atrocious manner. These forces have been supported by Western countries and trained by the special forces of many NATO member states, so a favourable middle ground must be found.
Above all, the veto is something that weakens the Atlantic Alliance....
That is why Turkey cannot veto the entry of Sweden and Finland because it weakens the Atlantic Alliance. Similarly, we have to understand that the transition from candidate state to full-fledged state in the case of Sweden and Finland will be extraordinarily rapid because their armed forces are already coordinated, perfectly aligned and technologically compatible with the rest of NATO. Moreover, they have been fighting hand in hand with our soldiers for years in places like Afghanistan. For example, the role of Swedish special forces in Afghanistan has been unanimously praised as essential.