It would be a terrible mistake for President Trump to recognize Ukrainian territory that was stolen by Russian armed aggression as being Russian territory. Unfortunately, that possibility is growing.
Following Trump’s comments last week in which the commander in chief hedged on continuing American rejection of Russia’s 2014 Crimea annexation, Trump’s national security adviser, John Bolton, over the weekend refused to rule out U.S. recognition of the Crimea usurpation. Pushed by Margaret Brennab of CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Bolton became agitated and declared, “The president makes the policy. I don’t make policy.”
That has me concerned. As I say, it would be disastrous for Trump to recognize Crimea as Russian territory.
Yes, Crimea is unlikely to return to Kiev’s rule any time soon. And the rigged March 2014 referendum which Russia used to appropriate Crimea did nonetheless reflect a deep vein of Russian sympathy among Crimeans. But from a U.S. interest standpoint, that’s not what’s important here.
What’s important is the principle of democratic states having a sovereign right to territorial integrity. Russia is systematically undercutting that principle in Ukraine, and Russian President Vladimir Putin sees Crimea as a crucial test case as to whether he can formally legitimize his usurpation of other states’ territories. If he succeeds in Crimea, Putin will have good reason to believe he can succeed in other states that formed part of the former Soviet empire. That matters because Putin has grand ambitions to fray the connectivity of the Baltic and the Scandinavian states away from the European Union and NATO. The key point is this: If Putin believes he can steal those states and then gradually win a grudging recognition of his theft, he won’t hesitate. In that sense, what happens in Crimea directly affects the broader deterrent posture of NATO in Europe. Those states, after all, are NATO members.
It is precisely for that reason that Russia is so keen to present Crimea as a natural extension of its territory — and why the Russian government gets so upset when its thievery is challenged.
In turn, while it’s true that Trump receives excessive blame for Europe’s increasing pro-Russian separation from the U.S., he would strike a hammer blow against U.S.-led international order were he to endorse “Russian Crimea.” Indeed, it would be Trump’s equivalent of Obama’s MH-17 debacle: a legacy-shaping failure in face of Putin’s aggression. It would weaken NATO and greatly strengthen Putin.
In short, whatever else Trump tries to agree to with Putin (most of which will be worthless anyway), Trump must not recognize Crimea as a new territory of Russia.
