This paper continues the conversation initiated by Greg Yudin and Ilya Budraitskis in their recent IGRec policy paper. They advocate for a new potential security system in greater Europe, in which civil society institutions play a more significant role alongside states. In the following text, I am going somewhat further and suggesting to create new European-level structures to accommodate national-cultural minorities.
The war between Russia and Ukraine, while an immediate result of Russian revanchist aggression, is strategically a consequence of the lack of multilateral security agreements following the results of the Cold War. The dissolution of USSR, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia as well as the unification of Germany did not lead to an international conference that would establish new rules, on the model of the agreements following both World Wars in the 20th century. The issues relating to the NATO expansion and military alliance allegiance are familiar and widely discussed. A less evident source of indeterminacy concerns the challenges of the multiethnic and multicultural societies that emerged after the Cold War in addition to those that preexisted in Europe or were formed as a result of mass immigration in the post-WWII period.
Beyond the obvious challenges of the mutual military buildup – where defensive actions can be perceived as offensive, and vice versa – there are equally pressing, albeit “peaceful,” concerns. Chief among them, in the author’s view, is Europe’s ethno-cultural structure. Ethno-linguistic issues served as one of the primary pretexts for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014 and 2022. While I agree with those who see these issues as a pretext rather than the Kremlin’s key motivation, the support of ethnic minorities remains a highly visible and influential justification. The irredentist cause and grievances of the Russian-speaking population in Ukraine have been widely covered in Russian media and have garnered genuine public sympathy, contributing to the war’s domestic popularity.
