The Ukrainian crisis is ultimately about resisting Russia’s pursuit of its national interest in its near-abroad because the only legitimate near-abroad, in Western eyes, is our own (“Ukraine: Russian border troops begin exercises”, 14 March). Needless to say, this is everywhere near and anywhere faraway. It’s Halford Mackinder’s heartland theory, which postulates that global hegemony requires control of the Eurasian heartland.
Make no mistake about it, the United States is determined to wrest the whole of Ukraine into its sphere of influence, even if it threatens a re-run of the mid-19th century Crimean War. That military adventure, incidentally, was as much about propping up Ottoman rule over its European Christian subjects as it was about thwarting Russia’s Balkan ambitions.
In all of today’s manoeuvrings against Russia, the European Union has played second fiddle to the Americans. Has the EU thought through the consequences of its eastern expansion and its recent offer to Ukraine of an association agreement which demanded, in effect, that Ukraine dump its links to Russia?
The EU’s headlong expansion eastwards suits America’s global ambitions, but it has chilling implications for the sovereignty of western European countries.
The mind boggles at the scale of uncontrolled immigration, given the EU’s accord on the free movement of peoples. Worse still, include Ukraine, Armenia, Georgia and Turkey, and the EU would border Chechnya, Syria, Iraq and Iran. But who, you may say, wants Turkey to join? Well, Britain’s three mainstream parties do. There are times when national interest trumps geopolitical considerations.
Winterborne Houghton Dorset