The war in Ukraine has now gone on for more than a year, causing death and destruction in its wake. It is no longer pertinent to ask how this war began, who caused it and which side aggravated it. That is a subject for academics and scholars in the years to come. For now, the incontrovertible facts are:
– Several thousand have lost their lives on both sides;
_ No sign of clear victory or total defeat for either side;
_ Continuation of war is certain to cause further death and destruction in the heart of Europe; and
_ While the war has been confined to a relatively small perimeter in Europe, its negative impact has been felt much wider. Besides, there is every danger of a wider conflagration with the possibility, howsoever remote, of the threat and use of Nuclear Weapons.
Given the above, a time has perhaps come when the international community (however you define it) has to put pressure on both sides to the conflict, namely, Ukraine and Russia to come to the table for negotiations. Hitherto, both sides were entertaining hopes of significant gains in the battlefield which will strengthen their hand in eventual negotiations. But that is a perilous course to follow which cannot be allowed by the international community any longer.
It is clear that the overwhelming majority of the Global South would welcome an end to the war through dialogue and diplomacy. That leaves the West including US and NATO, which appear reluctant to push Ukraine to the negotiating table. No rational person believes Ukraine can last any reasonable length of time without support from the West. Russia, on the other hand, says it is open to dialogue provided it is unconditional, which roughly translated, would mean that they will not vacate any Ukrainian territory they have occupied.
There is a noticeable hardening of the stand by Ukraine. The chief diplomatic adviser to President Zelensky, Ihor Zhovkva, reportedly told Reuters yesterday that Ukraine was not interested in a ceasefire that locks in Russia’s territorial gains. So, how to reconcile these opposing stands by the two sides? It is worth noting that all mediation attempts so far by Turkey, Brazil and China have made very little progress.
One way out would be for the Global South represented by countries like India and Brazil, combined with the West led by the US and EU to issue a joint public appeal to Ukraine and Russia to stop hostilities and resume dialogue. The proposed dialogue will not be based on any peace plan but merely list out the demands of both sides after hearing them out. An international peace conference could be hosted by a country like France to take things forward.
Although positions have hardened on both sides, the following strategic reality should be obvious to all:
(a) Ukraine is too small a country to win this war and Russia too big a country to lose. This has become more and more obvious as the war has dragged on.
(b) The good old formula of land for peace is perhaps the way this conflict will end. A good compromise will leave both Ukraine and Russia equally dissatisfied. Russia cannot be expected to part with Crimea, just as Ukraine cannot be expected to part with the four “oblasts” annexed by Russia in full or part: Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.
(c) It is clear that Russia’s legitimate security interests as well as those of Ukraine and EU have to be factored in a final settlement.
There are times when problems are intractable and the war in Ukraine is certainly one of them. In such cases, time is the only long-term solution. For now though, the international community has a fundamental obligation to ensure the cessation of hostilities.
Diplomacy and Geopolitics 