We must be prepared to pay a steep price to defend democracy

Editorial: The international community has to take a different and firmer posture on Russia – and it has to see it through

(Dave Brown)

The prime minister told the Commons that the response to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine “must include ending Europe’s dependence on Russian oil and gas”. He did not specify the timetable by which that might happen, beyond promising to squeeze Russia out of the global economy “day by day and week by week”.

Earlier, in his televised address to the nation, Boris Johnson promised to “hobble the Russian economy”, but the hard truth is that cutting Europe off from Russian natural gas will go some way towards hobbling our own economies too. Surprisingly, perhaps, it was Sir Keir Starmer for the opposition who was more willing to talk about the economic pain that we must be prepared to suffer. Mr Johnson, although he had some stirring words about standing by the Ukrainian people and defending democracy, felt that he had to reassure the British people that the government would try to protect them from the repercussions of sanctions against Russia for “our cost of living”.

Of course, any government must try to protect those who can least afford it from the worst effects of sanctions – as this government has already sought to do with its “buy now, pay later” scheme to soften the blow of rising natural gas prices so far. But if Europe is cut off from Russian supplies, all European countries including Britain will see prices rising further, even if the UK imports only a small proportion of Russian gas, because prices are set in the international market.

Mr Johnson should have said that, if we value democracy, we, a rich and democratic country, must be prepared to pay a steep price to defend it. He was absolutely right to say that we must resist any temptation to accept a “creeping normalisation” of Mr Putin’s aggressions, but past history suggests that resisting this temptation will require a special effort. From the start of his time as Russian leader, Mr Putin got away with aggression in Chechnya, Georgia, South Ossetia, Belarus, Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk. In each case, the international community sold the principles of democracy and self-determination too cheaply.

For the whole of his time as Russian leader, the democracies of the world have tried to recognise the sensitivities of Russian nationalism after the collapse of the Soviet Union, in the hope of welcoming a democratic and economically successful Russia into the community of free nations.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment sign up to our free weekly Voices newsletter by clicking here

Those hopes have been unrealistic for some time, for as long as Mr Putin or his ilk control the country. Now the international community has to take a different and firmer posture, and it has to see it through. The right of the Ukrainian people to decide their own future must be asserted, and Mr Putin must face ever-increasing pressure to accept it.

The Independent had long argued that Mr Putin would not attempt to occupy and subjugate the whole of Ukraine, because the cost to Russia would be too great. It turned out that we had misjudged the strength of Mr Putin’s paranoid worldview – one which now blames Lenin and Stalin for allowing Ukraine to develop its national identity separate from Russia. But even Mary Dejevsky, our commentator known for her understanding of Mr Putin’s position, writes today that he has “very probably” made a “catastrophic miscalculation”.

But it is still a calculation of sorts. That means that it is still important that Ukraine’s allies raise the cost to Mr Putin of his ill-judged invasion. That means hard decisions that will cost us dearly too. It ought to be unthinkable that democratic nations should continue to buy natural gas from Russia while it is at war with our ally. That is a price we must pay.