A Finnish soldier participates in amphibious operations as part of Nato sea exercises. Photo / AP
A Finnish soldier participates in amphibious operations as part of Nato sea exercises. Photo / AP
Editorial
EDITORIAL
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins is on a short stay at home between two major overseas trips.
The visit to China focused heavily on trade, and his upcoming attendance at the Nato summit in Lithuania will be about international security.
In reality, the two travel legs are chapters of thesame book.
Nato and European countries are taking more interest in political and security developments in Asia, and China’s ties with Russia have been under intense scrutiny over the invasion of Ukraine.
New Zealand is part of Nato’s Asia Pacific Four group with Japan, South Korea and Australia, and is having to tread carefully between the lines of our trading future and our defence interests.
Illustration / Rod Emmerson
Hipkins’ work in China was aimed at boosting New Zealand’s economic recovery, the most important current goal for this country. The Nato meeting next week also comes at a particularly critical time.
The brief but significant challenge to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s authority from the Wagner Group mutiny has raised doubts about his support within the security services.
Mercenary leader Yevgeny Prigozhin and his fighters faced very little resistance on their journey towards Moscow. Putin’s regime has been based on strong security backing and fear of consequences for opposing that apparatus.
As Mark Galeotti, a Russia expert at University College London, wrote in the Times of London: “A police state must be able to depend on its police when the next crisis hits, or it is nothing.”
Since the mutiny, senior defence officials have been out of the public eye and the Kremlin has tried to project calm and control.
China’s current alliance with Russia is based on Putin remaining in charge there. If that changes, Beijing may be more cautious about its ties with Moscow.
Or it could now see more opportunity. US CIA director William Burns said the mutiny showed the corrosive effects of the war, and Russia’s “future as a junior partner and economic colony of China” was being shaped “by Putin’s mistakes”.
One of the fallouts of the rebellion has been the deal to send Prigozhin and Wagner fighters to Belarus, effectively the Nato border.
What Nato should do about that is likely to be discussed at the Nato summit in Vilnius, Lithuania on July 11 and 12.
Then there’s the question of whether Putin’s domestic problems may hasten the beginning of the end of the war. Infighting among generals and uncertain allegiances could be eased by consolidation of power back home after the over-reach of war.
Officials in Kyiv are reported to have outlined to Burns a plan to apply enough pressure on Russia around Crimea to encourage a ceasefire and negotiations.
Ukraine, for its part, wants a clear indication at the summit that it will be able to join Nato when the war ends. It also wants guarantees of safety until then.
The US and Germany have been especially wary of bringing Nato into direct conflict with Russia. But having Ukraine under the Nato umbrella would seem the best way of deterring future aggression.
Most likely, a post-war future would involve a highly-militarised border on both sides.
