European governments reacted with Pavlovian unanimity to the violent clashes in Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, in which more than 25 people died. Someone, somewhere, must be "sanctioned." Who? It isn't clear. How? Even less so. The need to appear as doing something - anything - will triumph. But nothing the Europeans can do will hide the uncomfortable truth that, for now, the EU and its members have only a few limited options - none of which can be very effective in the short run.
Ministers seem to believe they will be able to come up with targeted sanctions "against those responsible for violence." But drones haven't been invented yet in political and economic conflicts. Besides, who should be held "responsible?" The special forces soldier whose gun killed a demonstrator, the policeman who kidnapped and tortured a journalist, the minister who is their boss, or higher up, Ukraine's President Viktor Yanukovich? And shouldn't Vladimir Putin, the Russian president whose heavy-handed policies are at the heart of the crisis, be considered "responsible" for what is happening under his watchful eye?
That doesn't mean that the EU should sit on its hands. While full-blown economic measures against Kiev would mostly hurt the population - and force Yanukovich into deeper entrenchment - limited and symbolic sanctions can remind Ukrainians that Europe is on their side. Beyond that, the EU faces a tough balancing act, as long as there is some possibility that Ukraine might change course and leave Russia's orbit some day.
The best Europeans can do is remain open to a deep economic partnership with Ukraine - maybe deeper than the one originally contemplated - but only with a regime that has changed its ways. If there is still a chance that might happen, it is worth abstaining from grand posturing. If, on the other hand, EU leaders decide that Yanukovich has reached a point of no return, the only thing to do is wait for his ouster, while bracing for long, painful years of confrontation with Russia.
Ministers seem to believe they will be able to come up with targeted sanctions "against those responsible for violence." But drones haven't been invented yet in political and economic conflicts. Besides, who should be held "responsible?" The special forces soldier whose gun killed a demonstrator, the policeman who kidnapped and tortured a journalist, the minister who is their boss, or higher up, Ukraine's President Viktor Yanukovich? And shouldn't Vladimir Putin, the Russian president whose heavy-handed policies are at the heart of the crisis, be considered "responsible" for what is happening under his watchful eye?
That doesn't mean that the EU should sit on its hands. While full-blown economic measures against Kiev would mostly hurt the population - and force Yanukovich into deeper entrenchment - limited and symbolic sanctions can remind Ukrainians that Europe is on their side. Beyond that, the EU faces a tough balancing act, as long as there is some possibility that Ukraine might change course and leave Russia's orbit some day.
The best Europeans can do is remain open to a deep economic partnership with Ukraine - maybe deeper than the one originally contemplated - but only with a regime that has changed its ways. If there is still a chance that might happen, it is worth abstaining from grand posturing. If, on the other hand, EU leaders decide that Yanukovich has reached a point of no return, the only thing to do is wait for his ouster, while bracing for long, painful years of confrontation with Russia.