The Munich Security Conference was founded to promote dialogue between opponents, but this year’s three-day meeting was a place for allies to exchange views, writes Politico.
Before the meeting, there were warnings that the Munich Security Conference would thus become a gathering of allies. However, this is not quite the case, and it is still not entirely clear whether all allies see the situation in the same way. Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis told Politico that the Munich conference gave an opportunity to feel the general mood, especially on the currently important issues.
The meeting in Munich also caused concern for Landsbergis, mainly because, since the beginning of the war, the Western countries have not been able to agree on what the outcome of the war should be. Of course, Ukraine knows what it should be. It wants to recover all Russian-occupied territories, including Crimea; get Moscow to compensate for all losses, and receive security guarantees. However, the leaders of France, Germany, and also Italy talked about a truce and reconciliation as recently as April and May of last year. Since then, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz have reversed course.
Macron said in Munich that this was not the time for dialogue and that he had not spoken to Putin since last autumn.
Scholz, whose government until recently hesitated to give permission for the transfer of Leopard tanks to Ukraine’s disposal, called on the countries not to delay and to send the tanks now.
At the same time, talk of a settlement continues to be heard. There is a concern in Kyiv that there are people in US President Joe Biden’s administration who would be happy to cut aid to Ukraine, and since the West does not have a unified view of the desired outcome, this may happen at some point.
The Lithuanian Foreign Minister said: «My main question is why haven’t we ever had a conversation about the end goal?
The only discussions or ideas that get floated around are about negotiations and peace processes — and all that makes a lot of people in my part of Europe quite nervous.
Okay, so we talk about victory, and we talk about standing with Ukraine to the very end — but let’s also talk about this.» According to him, military experts clearly know what needs to be done for Ukraine to win, but without setting specific goals, it is only ad hoc for Ukraine to continue fighting for anything that it can protect.
«We’re approaching a very important period,» said Landsbergis. He and other officials from the Baltic and Central European countries want at least to have clearly defined commitments on arms and ammunition supplies in the coming months. He added that he often hears that Russia has already lost on a strategic level, but he does not think so.
A strategic loss would mean that Russia is undergoing a historic change and can no longer continue with its current policies, even if it means the dissolution of the Russian Federation.
Landsbergis does not advocate such a result of the war but uses it as a comparison. At the time when the Soviet Union collapsed, there were people in the West who called on the Baltic States and Ukraine not to leave the USSR. Among them were German and French officials who feared that the dissolution of the union would destabilize the situation in the region.
Similarly, there are people now who are worried about the impact that losing the war could have on the processes inside Russia. Landsbergis asked: «So, should we stop? Should we ask the Ukrainians to put a moratorium on the regaining of their territory?» According to him, the answer is «no».
Read also: Ukraine holds positions; leaders of Western countries meet in Munich