Event Recap: New Normal for European Security Architecture? Vision from the Baltic Sea Region

For the full recording of the event

After the 2008 Russian-Georgian war and the more recent conflict in Crimea in 2014, many are asking: are we now in a ‘new normal’ for European security architecture? “The short answer is, ‘no’” says Ambassador Janis Mazeiks, Permanent Representative of Latvia to the United Nations. “The starting point for the present situation is the crisis in Ukraine and annexation of Crimea. Latvia was occupied [by the USSR] for 50 years under the convention of international law, but that wasn’t the new normal and this shouldn’t be either.” Last Wednesday, Ambassadors Olof Skloog and Audra Plepyte, Permanent Representatives of Sweden and Lithuania, respectively, to the UN, as well as Lauri Malksoo, Professor of International Law at the University of Tartu, Estonia, joined Ambassador Mazeiks for a panel discussion titled “A New Normal For European Security Architecture? Vision from Baltic Sea Region”. The discussion was moderated by Yuriy Sergeyev, Senior Fellow and Lecturer at Yale University and former Ambassador of Ukraine to the UN.

The speakers discussed the changing military-political dynamics in the Baltic Region, and in Europe more generally, in light of about a decade of Russian military buildup and more aggressive foreign policy. “The situation in Ukraine opened up the fact that a country can lose its territory in a few weeks; it changed our understanding of the threat. Before, the threat was more theoretical, but now it is much more real” says Ambassador Plepyte. Ambassador Mazeiks agrees, noting, 2014 “is the first time since the establishment of the UN when one member state has formally annexed the territory of another, and it was a wake up call.” Since then, the Baltic States have all increased their defense spending, Latvia and Lithuania reaching the suggested level of 2% of GDP for NATO members and Sweden moving to build closer ties with NATO. “We are nonaligned”, says Ambassador Skloog, “but we are not necessarily neutral. We are at the core of Western Europe and we belong to the NATO way of thinking.”  Motivating the Baltic States’ increased defense spending is the firm belief that “Russia has absolutely no veto in where former Soviet Union countries turn.”

Russia, however, takes a very different view of the situation. As Professor Malksoo pointed out, Russia has repeatedly criticized the U.S. and NATO for violating international law (Kosovo 1999, Iraq 2003, and Libya 2011), and uses this to justify its actions in Crimea. Moreover, “for Russia, NATO is biggest red flag, so Russia subjectively perceives it as bad when NATO forces approach its borders”, and has been increasing the scope scale of its zapad (western) military exercises.

Yet, Russian military activity is not the only challenge the Baltic States have to face; it is only one part, perhaps the most visible part, of Russia’s hybrid warfare tactics. Information wars, fake news, disinformation, cyberattacks, and energy misuse – all of these have “different connotations” in Europe than in the U.S. says Ambassador Plepyte. “What we have noticed in the last years is Russia’s increase in efforts and money to put doubts in society, use of all means to shake the values, Western values, of people in our countries, disseminate so many contradicting news that people lose what is reality…”

In response to what they see as increasing Russian aggression, all Baltic States have sought to strengthen and expand existing security partnerships.  NATO involvement in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia has included establishing an enhanced forward presence, sending in armed troops and increasing air patrols. Overall, twenty NATO members are currently engaged in the Baltic States and Poland, and “maybe because of this enhanced presence our population was much less nervous this fall when the Russian army was doing zapad exercises”, says Ambassador Mazeiks. Meanwhile, in the realm of cyber attacks and information wars, Lithuania has been one of the leading countries on creating rapid response teams on cybersecurity. Sweden has also been increasing military and security cooperation with the Baltic States and NATO, and has stationed permanent troops on Gotland (an island in the Baltic Sea).

            Given the military buildup by both Russia and the Baltic States, Sergeyev asks: are we in a new Cold War, and did the old one ever really end? The ambassadors say, “no”, noting that there is no global confrontation, no huge armies facing each other, no proxy wars on every continent. “Despite the difficulties we have, I hope we are not in a new Cold War” says Ambassador Mazeiks. It is critical, now more than ever, to increase the resilience of European society, says Ambassador Plepyte: “Europe is not so united as it might look, and the world is very different now from what it was when we all started working in 1993-94. We have to look for structures and possibilities that all countries would be involved in, to not be afraid of additional cost but to see where there are advantages to cooperation.” All four nations also support PESCO (the EU’s Permanent Structure on Cooperation for security and defense) as another means toward increasing regional security, and view the U.S. as a critical partner. As Professor Malksoo notes: “The future of European defense cooperation will depend on what will happen to America’s relationship with NATO and its commitment in Europe. If this commitment should weaken over time, then European countries have no alternative but to develop [their own security structure]…I think [U.S. President] Trump has had good point – Europeans cannot outsource their security to America.”

Written By Michelle Printsev, YC 2019, Berkeley College