Responding to Putin's threats

 

Respond with Firmness to the Drones, Sabotage, and Threats of Vladimir Putin

Victor Ângelo

The swarms of drones that have recently been flying over military installations and airports in certain Western European states are hostile acts carried out by enemy forces. They should be viewed in parallel with cyber-piracy actions against highly relevant economic infrastructure and as complementary to attempts to interfere in the political life and electoral campaigns of European democracies.

The scale and complexity of these attacks leave no doubt as to their authors. They can only be organized by special secret services, at the behest of a leadership that intends to weaken, create chaos, and shatter our defense alliances and our value systems. They are a threat to the stability of all of us and a cause of great concern, especially for the populations of Eastern and Northern Europe. They are also aimed at diverting attention and forcing the expenditure of resources that could be allocated to supporting Ukraine's legitimate defense.

These aggressive provocations and interventions come with no label or tag that says "made in Russia." But the targeted countries and their allies have every reason to indict the Kremlin's leaders. This is the political stance that must be adopted. Any analysis of the facts inevitably leads to the inescapable presumption that Moscow is launching a disguised, cunning, and hybrid aggression against democratic Europe. We are facing a series of subtle military offensives that, if not met with an adequate response, could lead to an escalation. These are not mere tests to gauge our firmness. We are already in another phase.

The first phase of the response should involve the imposition of even more restrictive diplomatic measures against Putin's Russia. These measures should include non-accreditation of Russian diplomatic personnel beyond a minimum number of officials, the limitation of their scope of action to the metropolitan areas of European capitals, excluding any authorization to circulate outside the capitals, and tight surveillance of the activities carried out by these diplomatic or ostensibly diplomatic agents. Russian ambassadors should face a protocolary demotion in their contacts with the Ministries of Foreign Affairs in our countries. Political dialogue with the Kremlin's representatives is of little or no use, except for Putin.

These restrictions would complement the sanctions imposed by the European Union, which, by the way, need to be tightened. Furthermore, the Atlantic Alliance must deepen its capacity to combat these and other threats and provocations. Here there are three fundamental concerns: intensifying air and maritime defense patrols and means on the eastern flank and in the Baltic Sea region; increasing the technological capacity for identification, jamming, and electronic disorientation of enemy vessels, including a significant expansion of radiation beam emitters—"lasers"; and destroying invaders with appropriate, low-cost means. The production of these means must be done on a large scale, in cooperation among member states and taking advantage of the knowledge dramatically developed by Ukraine. There is much to learn from the Ukrainians, even before it becomes necessary to spend fortunes on missiles.

The use of missiles is, however, justified when it comes to violations of NATO airspace by armed Russian fighters. It is an extremely sensitive issue, no doubt. But the 12-minute overflight of Estonian airspace, as happened on September 19 with three MiG-31s, requires an energetic reaction. This time, the Italian air force escorted the intruders out of the Atlantic Alliance's space. But more will be needed: formally and appropriately warning Moscow that new violations of this type will be treated as offensive acts and that, therefore, vessels alien to the Alliance, if considered a real threat, will be shot down. Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary-General, opted for a more generic and ambiguous statement. Perhaps he was right, but ambiguity, in Putin's case, is understood by him as an attitude of weakness.

It is possible that we will continue to see an intensification of attacks without a label or signature against us. Dictatorships are a form of madness, and dictators consider themselves invincible geniuses.

It is advisable not to conclude without adding that it is a mistake to think that Portugal is outside Moscow's orbit of action. The Kremlin wants us to think that way and knows our weaknesses: the existence of vulnerabilities to enemy espionage operations; the lack of resources to protect our maritime area, which can be used for the circulation of Russian attack and sabotage submarines; and the predominance of a political and intellectual class that does not understand or does not want to take seriously the dangers facing democratic Europe. Putin forgets, however, that Portugal counts on the cooperation of its allies, within the framework of NATO.

On Russia and the unity of the West

The Kremlin has been surprisingly slow in responding to the measures taken by Theresa May against Russia´s hostile actions. It´s difficult to come up with a good interpretation of the reasons for the delay.

But two things are clear.

First, I have no doubt they will retaliate. Heavily. And, most likely, before the Sunday presidential elections. The leadership, and Vladimir Putin above all, must show to the Russian voters that they do hesitate when it comes to defending Russia´s international honour and strength, as perceived by the official narrative.

Second, the Kremlin was clearly taken by surprise when they noted the unity shown in the West, particularly in Washington, Paris and Berlin. They wanted to respond to the UK and keep the West divided. Now, they have two big tasks. To deal with the British and look for ways of breaking the common position taken by key Western players.

There is fog in the land

I accept the accusation made by the British government against the Russian leadership. Those leaders are most likely behind the chemical attack against the Skiprals, father and daughter. But there is a fundamental question that has not be attended to. What is the reason for the attempted murder? And I could add two more interrogations. Why now? Was the father still active in matters of intelligence?

If these questions get no answer - and probably they will remain unanswered – then we will be just trading in fog and obscurity.

The capital of Europe is a little village at heart

Belgacom, the Belgian telecommunications giant, could not protect us, the subscribers in Brussels, from an illegal intrusion into our accounts by the British espionage services. The GCHQ, the UK agency that spies on communications networks, has been able to gladly penetrate the Belgacom systems and extract all the information they deemed useful for their masters in London.

Why should one be surprised? I live in a street that is considered “very fine”.  Notwithstanding that I have a weak internet signal. Today, the Belgacom technician came to check, at my request – a request that was made two weeks ago and dutifully booked then to be implemented today. He told me that the line for my house derives from a box some 80 metres away. That´s not bad, I thought. But he added that the fellows that laid down the cables went around the block before reaching my house. Therefore, it was no longer an 80 metres journey but a long trek through the side and back streets. That explains why my signal is not strong enough.

He promised me they would now bring a straight line from the box to my place. When, I do not know. But soon, I am told.

I asked him about fibre cables. The answer I got was very clear. Belgacom has now approved the implementation plan to lay the fibre things. But he is now sure about the starting date of the up-dating.

Well, this is the EU capital. But I think they have not yet realised that at the telecomm company. Another proof of it is that we have no Al Jazeera in our channel list, I mean, no access to that key TV channel in English. If I want to watch it, it is in my room… in Arabic!

Recently I told this story to my friends in Foreign Affairs in Oslo. They couldn´t believe that a place like this one cannot access the English version of Al Jazeera. But they have to understand: Brussels keeps, in many ways, the features of a small town. And that is charming! And frustrating, as well!

Individualism is a key value of today´s world

The political leaders seem to have lost control, in several countries, of their national security apparatus.

The espionage saga is still very much unfolding. It is certainly undermining President Obama´s international prestige. And that´s a pity, for many reasons. But it will end up by undermining other leaders ‘reputations as well, I fear.

It is quite obviously that the EU leaders are in hot water: either they were not aware of their services´ activities, or they are trying to deceive us. In any case, it is not good news. If they were not aware, that means they can easily be fooled. I would not be surprised, in some cases.

On the other hand, if they are trying to mislead the public opinion about what they really knew and about their hidden intentions, they are missing two important points: people have presently more access to information than ever and they will end up by knowing what is going on; secondly, people´s privacy is a key issue today as it was yesterday; one should not confuse participation in social networks with willingness to disclose every aspect of one´s life. Privacy remains a very valued feature of today´s life. It is actually linked to individualism, a key dimension of the modern times. 

Security obsessions

The US say, through the National Security Agency (NSA) that President Obama was not aware that Angela Merkel’s telephone had been “monitored” by American spies. Nobody would believe it, of course. But this is the right answer to be given, at this stage. It offers everyone a way out.

And tomorrow public opinion will have moved on to other subjects. Merkel and Obama will carry on. They will reaffirm they are allies. Some token gestures will be made. They have little choice but to be seen pulling in the same direction.

And NSA, on its own, will continue its job as well. And, as usual, in a very obsessive way. There might be an enemy behind the hundreds of millions of calls and mails they catch every day.

Naïve Merkel

Again, as I listen to Angela Merkel and her reactions to the spying the US practices all over the world, I get a bit nervous. How could she be so naïve and believe the US would not seek to spy on her? This is a matter of great concern if we take into account that her naïveté is combined with an immense political power. Easy to fool leaders are in charge and one can only feel very uncomfortable that is the case. If she cannot see the threats coming from the friends, how can she deal with the danger coming from the enemies? 

Prying eyes

President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil said that her planned visit to the US can only go ahead if she receives a clear explanation from President Obama regarding the spying accusations. Indeed, the US seems to have been snooping on the Brazilian President –and others, such as the Mexican head of State. This is certainly a very unfriendly action and one understands Dilma’s position. It is the only acceptable response.

But in diplomacy realism tends to prevail. She will receive some type of assurances from Obama. Then, she will say the US has apologised and the visit will move on. That’s fine. By then, the point would have been clearly stated. The question will however remain: one cannot envisage an American administration that is not “watching” under cover what the two main rivals of the US in Latin America are cooking. Washington will say sorry, and then change the system and will continue the old practise. It is in their blood and in their own interest, as they see it.

It is up to Brazil and others to keep protesting and keep saying this is not acceptable.  And to try to protect itself from prying eyes.

Spying on me is good for my ego

With all this spying that is going on, all over, one should feel important, because so many services are interested in what one is doing and saying.  

Our friends the spies from the other side of the table...

I do not understand why some EU leaders, in the Parliament and the Commission, are so surprised by the news that the Americans have been spying on them. You have to be very naïve or have no experience of international affairs to believe that “friendly nations” are just that, friends…Friends have interests and they try to protect them. That means, among other things, that they want to know, well in advance, what you are cooking, to be able to reach the dinner table prepared for event…

The US has a special interest in EU affairs. They are particularly interested in trade intelligence, but also on the European positions regarding key international matters, such as Iran, Israel, Russia, Security Council resolutions and so on. Furthermore, they hope to get some additional information about other players by plugging in to the intelligence systems of the European nations.  

They have also a special sharing system with like-minded nations such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and… the UK. Therefore, the British are very much aware of the US is doing regarding the gathering of clandestine information in Brussels, Berlin, Paris, or elsewhere. This also raises a very simple issue: many of the things that are said within the EU are certainly shared by London with their Washington mates. So what? Just make your position clear and transparent and be also sure that when you negotiate with the US you are negotiating with a very well informed – and therefore prepared – interlocutor.