Republican U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska is right to say that Interpol, the international policing facilitator, should expel Russia from its membership and block Russian access to its databases.
Indeed, organizations worldwide should be doing more to isolate, exclude, and punish Russia.
Sasse made his demand in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and Secretary of State Antony Blinken. He said the expulsion of Russia is necessary “to protect Interpol against potential abuses by the Russian government or to ensure that Russia does not exploit Interpol’s intelligence sharing function to further harm the people of Ukraine.” Sasse added that Russia and China already use Interpol in multiple ways to suppress and abuse political adversaries.
The United States has already joined several allies in asking Interpol to evict Russia, but Sasse’s letter asks a series of detailed questions about what specific steps, if any, have been taken to follow up. Sasse’s insistence on pressing the issue is wise. All too often, the diplomatic corps acts as if a fog of words actually accomplishes goals, even as the diplomats fail to back them up with substantive measures. If Russia is using Interpol intelligence to crack down on Ukrainians protecting their own country or on other entities protecting human rights, then it is imperative to cut Russia off from that source of information.
Please allow, however, a broader point. The very fact that Russia remains a member of Interpol is a symptom of a larger failing. Beginning not just with Russia’s armed invasion of Ukraine but during the months of Russian saber-rattling beforehand, the other nations of the world and their overhyped international organizations have been too slow and too weak in countering Russian aggression. The U.S. and other nations should have imposed sanctions against Russia as soon as Russia began amassing offensive troops at Ukraine’s borders and should have bounced Russia from the U.N. Security Council and suspended it from the U.N. General Assembly within 24 hours of the actual invasion.
Under U.N. auspices, the free world should have considered imposing a no-fly zone against Russia in Ukraine, should have instituted humanitarian airlifts, and could have provided direct protections (perhaps including international troops) to safeguard the key port and cultural gem, Odessa. It also should have rushed all possible military assistance from the very beginning of hostilities, along with the strongest of sanctions, rather than trying an endless game of careful calibration of responses. It is likely the human suffering in Ukraine has been tremendously worse because assistance was trotted out in periodic segments and levels. If the goal is to help Ukraine repel the invasion, then for goodness sake, give Ukraine the means to repel it quickly and decisively rather than stay one painful step ahead of the executioner.
Likewise, the incremental ramping up of the response makes it more likely, not less, that Russia will continue escalating to ever more dangerous degrees. Every time Vladimir Putin sees free-world hesitation, it gives him more reason to think that he can cause us to crack by upping his pressure just a little more. This is true in the context of nuclear weapons, too. The Russian doctrine of “escalate to de-escalate” is well-known. If Putin believes that one-time use of small “tactical nukes” will force the West to accept a settlement favorable to Russia, and if the West’s endless bet-hedging shows as much fear as resolve, he is more likely to use nukes than if he is told, unambiguously, that any nuclear use will mean his own obliteration.
So, by all means, expel Russia from Interpol. Then do what it takes to expel Russia from Ukraine altogether.
