Presentation Script

docx

School

Nova Southeastern University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

0686

Subject

Political Science

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ColonelSteelQuetzal30

Solution 1: https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/07/politics/volodymyr-zelensky-interview-cnntv/index.html FIND BETTER SOURCE BUT STILL USE SOLUTION 1 https://thehill.com/policy/international/3721682-u-s-privately-asking-ukraine-to-drop-public- refusal-of-peace-talks-with-russia-washington-post/ MABYE STILL USE SOLUTION 1 “We broke off diplomatic relations with Russia,” Zelenskyy said in a video message on Thursday. “Ukraine is defending itself and will not give up its freedom, no matter what Moscow thinks. Russia vilely and suicidally attacked our state in the morning. Just like fascist Germany did during the second world war.” Solution 3: https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/ukrainian-war-solution/ STILL USE SOLUTION 1 !!! Team Solution: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/12/21/russias-draft-agreements-with- nato-and-the-united-states-intended-for-rejection/ Problem Economically: https://www.oecd.org/newsroom/russia-s-war-of-aggression-against-ukraine-continues-to-create- serious-headwinds-for-global-economy.htm#:~:text=The%20global%20economy%20is %20expected,according%20to%20the%20OECD's%20latest

A New Start Table of Contents:  CONTEXT!!  Problem and implications: How the Russian Ukranian conflict worsens NATO, and how negative implications on NATO leads to bad things for everyone  Further elaboration on problem (graphs etc.)  Problem: The factors that have led up to the Russian-Ukraine conflict of 2022, date back to the Cold War Era. Russia & Ukraine, both part of the Soviet Union, shared a military companionship & overlap of territorial boundaries. Following the end of the Cold War, Ukraine became an independent state, much to Russia’s inconvenience. Created on April 4, 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was designed to be a counterbalance to the Soviet Union during the Cold War era. Despite the fall of the Soviet Union, one of NATO’s successes has been its longevity. One of the factors supporting this is the resistance of member states from letting the military alliance deplete after the Cold War. Over the next few years, NATO enhanced its European pillar, now having 30 member states as part of NATO, compared to the initial 12 founding ones. The Russian-Ukranian conflict truly began with the Illegal Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, and proxy war in Ukraine Donbass region. However, NATO’s involvement throughout Europe increased tensions with Russia. When NATO began following through with MAP (Membership Action Plan) with Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin of Russia finally took the initiative to respond with force, to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO as surrounding states have. In February 2022 he took military action against Ukraine. NATO is facing challenges more than ever before, the biggest stressor being the Russo-Ukranian conflict. According to a study by Dr. Susanne Zwingel, Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Aarhus University in Denmark, "The ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea by Russia have exposed significant divides among NATO member states, particularly with regards to the appropriate use of military force." Existing as a stable alliance for 73 years, NATO is a staple in the world as we know it today. With its increasing disunity, worsening domestic issues, as the Russian-Ukranian conflict continues, NATOS response determines the outcome of millions of people's lives, and if they will be able to keep up the defense in protecting freedom, democracy, & security. Issue 1: With the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, NATO has been forced to direct its focus and resources towards addressing the situation on its borders. This has placed a significant strain on the alliance, as it must balance addressing the conflict with maintaining its own internal unity and addressing domestic issues. This shift in priorities has caused tensions to rise within NATO, as member states have differing opinions on how best to handle the conflict. Additionally, the resources dedicated towards the conflict may come at the expense of addressing other pressing issues within the alliance, further exacerbating the disunity. As such, NATO is facing a

significant challenge in effectively addressing the Russo-Ukrainian conflict while maintaining its internal unity and addressing its domestic issues. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59766810 Issue 2: The Russia-Ukraine conflict has a significant impact on the energy security of many NATO member states, especially in Europe. These countries are heavily dependent on Russian natural gas as a primary source of energy. The Issue has brought to light the dependence of NATO member states on Russian energy, and the potential risks and challenges associated with this dependence. Furthermore, the conflict in Ukraine directly challenges NATO's trading relations and its ability to secure access to natural gas for its member states. This situation highlights the importance of energy security for NATO and the need for the organization to consider alternative sources of energy and diversification of energy supplies to reduce dependence on any single supplier. Alternative Solution (1): Having NATO be a Neutral Negotiator between Russia and Ukraine Description: By NATO having spoken communication with representatives from each member states, they can discuss how to resolve these issues on an international scale. Pros: - Will allow NATO to resolve conflict between Russia and Ukraine - By doing so, this will prevent any more negative implications on NATO - NATO can persuade Russia to commit to help, uphold, and guarantee the security of Ukraine, as well as allow them the freedom to associate economically and diplomatically with whomever they chose Cons: - Does not solve core problems between NATO - Putin has said yes to negotiation, but under extreme circumstances - Zelensky has already said no - Not realistic, they cannot make peace Limitations:  “We broke off diplomatic relations with Russia,” Zelenskyy said in a video message on Thursday.  “Ukraine is defending itself and will not give up its freedom, no matter what Moscow thinks. Russia vilely and suicidally attacked our state in the morning. Just like fascist Germany did during the second world war.”

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Script: One possible solution that NATO could take to address the Russian-Ukraine conflict, involves its role as a neutral negotiator between Russia & Ukraine. This includes having direct, spoken communication between representatives of NATO member states with representatives of Russia and Ukraine. The root of the problem as stated by Angela Stent, a senior adviser to the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies and professor of government and foreign service at Georgetown University, there is no de-escalation by Russia, rather they more so surround Ukraine with their military. Discussions will focus directly on problem-solving tactics to resolve the issues between these two countries on an international scale holistically. Further, it is imperative to the Euro-Atlantic area that Ukraine is independent as found by NATO themselves, the multinational organization in between this conflict. With Ukraine being provoked by Russia for such a long period international security is threatened and international law is disregarded. Pros of this proposition include that this would allow communication between member states as a unified front to resolve this conflict. By doing so, this would simultaneously prevent any more negative implications for NATO because NATO would be affording Russia a choice that’s ultimately beneficial to them as it provides them with freedom to associate how they please. However, the cons of this solution are that it does not solve the core problem between Ukraine and Russia, the conflict still happened, and tensions would still be high between the regions. Further Putin has said he is open to negotiation but as stated by President Zelensky himself, “...won’t be part of any diplomatic negotiations to end the war.” And finally, the solution just isn’t realistic. NATO has tried to be diplomatic before in the case of Yugoslavia, however that ended in a large bombing that took many lives. Professor of public and international affairs at Princeton University, Mario Zucconi, found how bitter disputes between NATO and the UN undermined their efforts to resolve the conflict involving Yugoslavia. Therefore, this solution is not viable. https://www.brookings.edu/podcast-episode/how-is-us-nato-diplomacy-addressing-russian-troop- buildup/ https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_37750.htm https://www.sipri.org/yearbook/1995/06 Alternative Solution (2): NATO Should Seek Alternative Sources for Trade Description: https://www.bbc.com/news/58888451 Pros: - Will diminish Russia’s importance in the global market - Will allow NATO member states to still have the resources they need (heat, electricity) that they used to rely on with Russia - Sanctions, goods, oil - It continues to isolate NATO from the conflict because they are not connected to Russia

- Diversifies imports of goods to more resources - Because Putin heavily relies on its exports for money, which is then put into their military, it would decrease how much money they receive since NATO member states would decrease their reliance on Russian resources, therefore decreasing Russia’s money for troops that are being sent into Ukraine https://energyandcleanair.org/publication/financing-putins-war-fossil-fuel-exports-from-russia- in-the-first-six-months-of-the-invasion-of-ukraine/ Cons: - They would have to find alternative that could be more expensive, which is bad - They are already below NATO’s recommended military GDP - They have to spend money on goods, rather than military help - NATO is already flooded with Ukrainian refugees, so they are suffering economic stability - They have to put this money into investments for Ukrainian refugees Script:  Another alternative solution is for European NATO member states to take the initiative in seeking alternative trading partners to accommodate their needs for energy resources. Russia’s economy is highly dependent on its energy sector, thus, European states, which are majority NATO member states, are major importers. By seeking alternative sources, a pro would be diminishing Russia’s importance in the global market. According to the Centre for Research on Energy & Clean Air, Russia’s exports were down 18% compared to the record level reached at the start of the invasion throughout February & March 2022, this fall was driven by a reduction in exports of pipeline gas, oil products, & coal. The EU & the United States, for example, have also cut off gas & oil imports from Russia, leading Russia to lose the millions worth of money economically. Putin heavily relies on profits made by exports to fund Russia’s military, thus by pursuing this alternative solution, Russia won’t have the convenience to continue sending military troops into Ukraine simultaneously, another benefitting outcome for NATO. At the same time, NATO member states will have the benefits of still having access to resources needed such as heat, electricity, oil, etc. which they once relied on Russia. Cons of this alternative solution, on the other hand, include the fact that finding an alternative could be more expensive, downgrading NATO’s economic state. Most NATO European states are also already below NATO’s recommended military GDP of 2.0% thus money would be invested into goods rather than military help to Ukraine. Not only that but there has already been economic instability due to the overwhelming flood of Ukrainian refugees into neighboring NATO states, such as Poland. Thus, this solution is not as effective as expected.

Team Solution: Proposals from NATO 2030 - (2) Strengthened Deterrence and Defense - (5) Uphold the Rules-Based International Order - (8) The Next Strategic Concept - (9) Investing in NATO Description: Our team solution is to take some proposals from NATO 2030. What is NATO 2030? NATO 2030 is an ambiguous agenda that aims to ensure that NATO remains a strong, unified organization for a new era of increased global competition. Pros: Increased cooperation, Strengthening of NATO ability to deter future conflicts Strengthening committed to ensuring the Alliance has the right resources, both through national defense expenditure and NATO common funding, to deliver on the NATO 2030 decisions. “ further steps will depend on the policies of the major European allies, mainly France and Germany” Cons: 1. NATOS 2030 proposals seek specifically to yes strengthen the alliance, but also in a way offensive to that of Russia furthering tensions, and only furthering the Ukrainian Conflict Limitations: - It would be harder to implement these policies faster than the year 2030, especially after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. NATO member states are more focused on aiding Ukraine that they don’t have the time, nor the resources to shift their focus elsewhere. Because of this, it would be difficult to implement this solution at a fast enough rate to counteract the implications of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Our Script: Description of Team Solution - Our team solution is to take proposals from NATO 2030 and implement them faster in order to counteract the negative implications on NATO by the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Now, what is NATO 2030? Well, NATO 2030 is an ambitious agenda with aims to make NATO even stronger and united to face future challenges. It was first developed in December 2019, being consulted with Allies and an independent group of experts to further shape the NATO 2030 agenda. The proposals that consist of NATO 2030 were discussed and made concrete at a NATO meeting on June 14, 2021, later being endorsed

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

by NATO leaders. With this initiative, it would strengthen the Alliance, both militarily, politically, and relationship-wise with each other. NATO leaders have agreed that the NATO 2030 agenda would strengthen the Alliance over the next decade and beyond because it would allow NATO to adapt to growing global competition and more unpredictable threats. However, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, some proposals of the NATO 2030 agenda need to be implemented now rather than later. Pros to the Team Solution - One pro to this final solution is that it would lead to increased cooperation between NATO member states. To illustrate, Proposal 1 of the NATO 2030 agenda is to deepen political consultation and coordination. In other words, it means to have Allies deepen, as well as broaden, political deliberations in NATO. They all agreed to consult with each other on matters that affect Allies’ security, which is crucial because NATO is the only platform that brings Europe and North America together. By having this proposal implemented faster, it would strengthen NATO’s role as the only platform for transatlantic consultations on security and defense. It would also ensure and reestablish that Europe and North America can successfully tackle security challenges together, as one. - Another pro is that the faster implementation of key proposals from the NATO 2030 agenda would strengthen NATO’s ability to prevent and better prepare for future conflicts. For example, Proposal 2 of the agenda is the strengthening of deterrence and defense. At the 2021 NATO meeting, Allies agreed to bolster this, but still manage to keep an appropriate balance between nuclear, conventional, and missile defense capabilities. With this implementation, it would strengthen the Alliance’s defense, as well as improve the readiness of their forces to meet current and future defense needs. Therefore, this proposal would strengthen NATO’s ability to deal with current conflicts, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and future conflicts that could arise. Cons/Limitations to the Team Solution - On the other hand, a con/limitation to this solution could be that the implementation of these proposals would offend Russia in a way that could further tensions between them and NATO member states. By causing this, it would also further the already tense Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Furthermore, it would be difficult to quickly and efficiently implement these proposals, considering how NATO is mainly focused on aiding Ukraine because of the Russian invasion. Because of this, NATO does not have the time, nor the resources to shift their focus elsewhere. This poses a problem in how NATO will not be able to implement these proposals at the fastest rate necessary for it to effectively counteract the implications of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Why Team Solution Is the Best - Despite this, our team solution is better than the other potential options for a number of reasons. First and foremost, it is not just negotiation that is being discussed, but rather action as well. This handles one of the limitations of the alternative solution talking about

negotiation because it does not have to worry about disagreements between Putin and Zelensky. In this sense, there is the actual prospect of there being action taken to combat the implications NATO faces because of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Regarding the second alternative solution, NATO would not have to worry about the expenses or costs of anything, hence not putting any additional burden on the economic instability they are already suffering from. https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/6/pdf/2106-factsheet-nato2030-en.pdf https://natolibguides.info/nato2030#:~:text=Making%20A%20Strong%20Alliance %20Even,today%20to%20face%20tomorrow's%20challenges. https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2020/12/pdf/201201-Reflection-Group-Final- Report-Uni.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia#:~:text=The%20North %20Atlantic%20Treaty%20Organization,1999%20to%2010%20June%201999.

Presentation Script

Related Documents