08. 1 2. 2 0 2 2

• PMC Wagner on sanction list
• Calls to designate PMC Wagner as terrorist group in EU
  
• What to do?

• Guarantees proposal
• Security guarantees as a Russian narrative
• What to do?

• Russian leverage over Germany
• Restricting Flow
• Finding Alternatives

• Projecting Outcomes

• Putin’s propaganda comes up with a new message: fight or be tried at the Hague
  
• Russian Wagner Group-affiliated telegram channel says DPRK is indeed providing arms to Russia
  
• From “Special Military Operation” to a “Win or Die” total war 

On the 29th of November Bloomberg argued that the administration of US President Joe Biden was considering whether to declare the Russian private military company (PMC) "Wagner" as a foreign terrorist organization. In this manner, the US can try to prevent the activities of the PMC in Ukraine and its growing presence in Africa. The recognition of PMC "Wagner" as a terrorist organization allowed the United States to begin criminal prosecution of the group and its members, as well as to seize its assets and sanction the partner companies around the world.

The "Wagner" group as well as its founder Yevgeny Prigozhin are already under sanctions from the USA, the EU, and Great Britain. The PMC was established in 2014 and has been active in several countries where Russia has interests, including Syria, Libya, the Central African Republic, and Ukraine. The militants are accused of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. Nevertheless, according to Bloomberg, the Biden administration has not yet made a final decision. The U.S. State Department declined to confirm the deal on the Wagnerites, but said the U.S. would "continue to hold accountable those responsible for Russia's war."

Later, on the 2nd of December, the State Department of the United States published a new list of countries and organizations that violate religious rights and freedoms. Among them is Russia and its PMC "Wagner". This was declared in the statement of the United States Secretary of State Anthony Blinken. The "Wagner Group" was classified as an entity of "special concern" for its actions in the Central African Republic. Also included in this list are Islamic groups Jamaat al-Shabaab, Boko Haram, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, Houthis, ISIS, Jamaat Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin, and the Taliban.

These days there were some voices about the "Wagner" group issue in European Union (EU) as well. Members of the European Parliament raised a question on listing Russia's PMC "Wagner" as a terrorist organization and called the EU to adopt an appropriate decision on that. On 22 November, they sent a letter to the European Council President Charles Michel and Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala, whose country chairs the EU Council, and called for an urgent hearing in the European Commission on recognizing PMC "Wagner" as a terrorist organization. In response to this news, the founder of the PMC Wagner, Yevgeny Prigozhin, proposed to send a sledgehammer covered in fake blood to the European Parliament.

For that moment Estonia is the only country, which has recognized the PMC "Wagner" as a terrorist organization. "Europe should apply the same approach to PMC "Wagner" as to ISIS. Ban them in Europe and freeze their assets," – Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Reinsalu said on the 28th of November. It is noticeable that both the US and the EU have already made strong steps on their way to recognizing PMC "Wagner" as a terrorist organization. As one of the main pillars of Western policy towards Russia is to weaken its ability to finance the war, both the EU and the US should list PMC "Wagner" as a terrorist organization. This particular decision will make the financing of mentioned PMC more difficult as well as complicate the ability to act in Ukraine and around the globe.

The West should consider how to address Russia's need for security guarantees if President Vladimir Putin agrees to negotiations about ending the war in Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron said in an interview with French TV station TF1. This initiative drew strong criticism from Ukraine and the EU member states.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland emphasized that today Russia is a security threat to Europe that requires guarantees, not the other way around. The MFA of Finland expressed the same position. The head of the governing Servant of the People faction and Ukraine's chief negotiator with Russia, David Arakhamia, said Kyiv is ready to provide Russia with security guarantees after it withdraws its troops from Ukraine, pays reparations, brings all war criminals to justice, and voluntarily surrenders nuclear weapons.

Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) Oleksiy Danilov spoke even more harshly: "Someone wants to provide security guarantees to a terrorist and killer state?" Referring to the post-second world war tribunals, he added: "Instead of Nuremberg – to sign an agreement with Russia and shake hands?" An adviser to the head of the President's Office, Mykhailo Podolyak, said the world instead needed security guarantees from Russia, which should be held accountable.

For the first time since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron publicly expressed the idea of providing "security guarantees" for Russia. Before the full-scale invasion of the Russian occupiers, this was one of the main conditions of the Kremlin and the central topic of complicated negotiations between Moscow and Washington. As before February 24, this idea looks absurd because it does not solve the key security purposes of Europe. NATO did not pose any threat to Russia in early 2022, and it was only a reason for Putin to start an aggressive war against Ukraine. Similarly, security guarantees are Kremlin's manipulation and blackmail.

The rhetoric of security guarantees and negotiations with the aggressor is a continuation of the Russian narrative, which is only in favor of Moscow. Talks with the Kremlin now mean giving the Russians an operational pause to restore their troops and accumulate resources for further attack. Such ideas are strengthening the position of the Putin regime; at the same time, it illustrates the weakness of European politicians.

Macron's "peacekeeping" efforts did not give any results in the spring when he called for “help Putin save his face,” "not humiliate Putin," and "not provoking Russia." They will not be successful now. A flurry of criticism from European and Ukrainian politicians is evidence of this. However, these messages are dangerous for the European Union because they split the unity of the EU member states, could exacerbate internal conflicts, and increase differences in positions, signaling to the Kremlin that "Europe is weak."

Today, Ukraine and the states of Central and Eastern Europe need security guarantees because of Russia's brutal and aggressive war. NATO, the EU, and Ukraine must develop an effective plan in this regard. In addition, the Russian leadership must be brought to justice for the act of aggression against a sovereign state and many war crimes committed in Ukraine. Strengthening sanctions and further support for Ukraine can preserve the unity of Europe. Ukraine's victory is a key goal that should unite Europe. Today, the shortest way to end the war is only due to heavy weapons, strict sanctions, and financial assistance to Ukraine. Such ally investment will stop the aggressor and prevent Europe from a big war.

After Russia cut off exports of natural gas and other fuels too much to the EU, Germany may have found a solution to avert a looming energy crisis. When Russian forces first invaded Ukraine, they had significant leverage over Germany and several other European adversaries: energy. Russia was one of the main suppliers of fossil fuels in the EU, and that supply has all but disappeared as Putin tries to leverage his most valuable asset against Ukraine’s allies. As the largest EU economy and a significant military ally of Ukraine, Germany’s ability to fuel its industrial sector and avoid widespread blackouts will determine how effectively it can support Ukraine.

Despite early skepticism, even from the German government, that Russia would engage in energy warfare, Putin has brought it to bear as arguably his most effective weapon. We have already seen how Russian shelling has devastated Ukraine’s national grid, but a broader European energy crisis could jeopardize its critical foreign assistance. In 2021, Russian exports comprised 40% of the EU’s total gas consumption, not to mention its supplies of coal and oil.

For Germany, Russian gas contracts accounted for 60% of their domestic consumption. Russia’s state-owned utility company Gazprom shut off this supply in late August by closing the Nord Stream 1 pipeline (later disabled by as-of-yet unexplained underwater explosions). For weeks before the eventual shutdown, Nord Stream 1 had already seen flow reductions and pauses in operation under the pretense of repairs. In combination with strict sanctions on Russian exports, including an EU coal embargo, Ukraine’s allies in Europe were left scrambling for alternative energy sources.

With winter fast approaching, Germany has managed to overcome numerous bureaucratic and logistical obstacles to construct a liquid natural gas (LNG) terminal. In Wilhelmshaven on the North Sea coast, foreign tankers can unload supplies of LNG. There, it will be converted from its more transportable liquid form back into a gas, and then redistributed across the country. This first terminal is nearly fully operational, and there are plans for yet another five. Imports of LNG should allow Germany to make up a significant portion of the energy deficit left by Russian gas, and will hopefully accelerate its shift away from Russian energy entirely. In addition to this transition to LNG, Germany will also attempt to reduce overall energy consumption in the coming months.

Germany’s support for Ukraine, and its domestic welfare, seem to have been secured in the short term. But this over-budget, €6 million project may have unintended consequences for the future. Germany has long been dependent not just on Russian fossil fuels, but on energy imports in general. In 2019, 71% of its energy supply was brought in from foreign trade partners.

This investment in domestic infrastructure will do nothing to change that fact, as these LNG terminals are just another means of importation. Furthermore, it may hinder the country’s transition to greener energy sources. In 2021, an impressive 48.5% of electricity was produced from renewable sources, while LNG only accounted for around 11%.

This embrace of LNG, which is still a fossil fuel, could interrupt the progress already towards Germany’s goal of generating 65% of its consumed electricity with renewables by 2030. Lastly, Germany’s scramble for alternative energy sources may make procurement harder for developing nations that already rely on LNG. In 2022, it hit its highest price level in over a decade.

After Russia’s unsuccessful invasion of Ukraine, fear of the palpable and inevitable defeat is so strong in the Kremlin that the Russian propaganda is no longer tasked to prove the importance of Ukraine’s “denazification” and “demilitarization”, or saving Russia from the evil West. Instead, the most influential propagandists of the country are now gradually preparing the citizens and warning them that in the event of losing the war, “even the street cleaner behind the Kremlin wall will go to the Hague” – a message voiced by RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan on Russia 1 TV channel. After justifying the continued bombing of Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure, Simonyan added that members of Russia’s “very high circles” are afraid of the Hague, the U.N International Court of Justice.

Given that low motivation among Russian soldiers is a serious challenge for the Kremlin, the propaganda machine is now landed on sowing a sense of collective guilt among the Russian troops and ordinary citizens, trying to unite them in the spirit of “if you are afraid of Hague, stay out of the forest”, - a paraphrase of a well-known Russian proverb (“If you are afraid of wolves, do not go into the forest”). All these messages, voiced by the Kremlin mouthpieces, are vetted from the higher circles and aimed at convincing people that Russia has already done enough to warrant an accusation from the Hague and therefore no one can afford to lose the war.

The sanctions imposed on Russia after launching an unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, according to Western intelligence reports, have forced Moscow to turn to pariah states like Iran and North Korea for military assistance. On its part, Russia has called these reports a lie. It has maintained that the kamikaze drones extensively deployed against Ukraine were not delivered by Iran, but produced within the country – though abundant evidence, including the Russian military expert Ruslan Kukhov’s inadvertent admission on live TV, has exposed the truth. The same is the case with North Korea – since early September, both Pyongyang as well as the Kremlin propaganda have been denying the US intelligence reports on DPRK providing Russia with millions of artillery shells and rockets.

But in a recent Telegram post from December 4, the Wagner Group-affiliated Grey Zone Telegram channel admitted that North Korea is indeed supplying arms to Russia. Discussing the Russian cargo plane movements from China to Russia, the channel claimed that since Iran and North Korea are already filling Russia’s military shortages, the planes heading to Russia from China might have been loaded with Chinese military supplies. Though Grey Zone concludes that due to its desire to refrain from direct involvement in Ukraine, it is unlikely that China is sending weapons to Russia.

For months, the Kremlin propaganda insisted that, instead of being involved in a full-scale war with Ukraine, the Russian troops were simply carrying out a “special military operation” – for a while now, though this approach has changed. After returning “from the front”, Igor Girkin (aka Strelkov), former “defense minister” of the self-proclaimed “DNR” posted about his experience on his Telegram channel, drawing a rather pessimistic picture for his fellow Russians. "In most parts of the Russian Armed Forces, soldiers and officers do not understand what they are fighting for”, – he said. Neither do they know "what the conditions are for victory or for simply ending the war", Girkin went further, and added that they do not have "the slightest idea about the ultimate strategic goals of the current military campaign."

Days before Girkins's assessment of the situation, another notorious Russian figure Dimitry Rogozin named his version of what the end goal of the war should be. In his interview with RT, Russia's former ambassador to NATO claimed that “this war is an existential choice because if we don’t win it, we won’t lose it, we will cease to exist.” Comparing Ukraine to Nazi Germany, Rogozin further stated that Russians once considered Nazi Germany their brotherly nation. According to him, Russia now would only win if it takes Kyiv – a difficult task for a country armed by Iran and North Korea, and staffed by inexperienced conscripts.

Itai Abraham – Dmytro Filonenko – Mariam Lashkhia

Thank you.

UNSUBSCRIBE