This article is an on-site version of our Swamp Notes newsletter. Sign up here to get the newsletter sent straight to your inbox every Monday and Friday.
There are few certainties in war, but one thing is certain: it will come to an end, and leaders will pass on. In the conflict in Ukraine, it is important to remember this at this critical moment. However, recent events have shown that the west’s foreign policy establishment has forgotten this, only focusing on short-term responses to possible incursions or sabotage schemes. Last week’s coup attempt by Yevgeny Prigozhin reminded the world that there will still be a Russia on Europe’s periphery once Putin is gone. This should be a reminder that planning for peace is just as important as planning for war.
Former Finnish prime minister, Alexander Stubb, framed the challenge this way: three times in the past century, the world had the chance to reorganize itself for peace and prosperity. In 1919, the world failed miserably. In 1945, the west got it right. And in 1989, the verdict is still out. Stubb argues that Putin’s invasion opens a historic window of opportunity akin to those three watershed years. It remains to be seen whether 2022 will be another 1919, or a 1945, or a 1989.
One lesson that stands out from history is that peace cannot be durable unless all major powers are brought into the fold and treated as equals. This was a failure after World War I, when the US turned isolationist and Germany was punished with reparations. Similarly, the failures of 1989 can be traced to an inability to integrate Russia into a new security architecture. The west must be prepared to reintegrate a post-Putin Russia into the international community, even if it means dealing with a regime we find odious.
The question is whether advocating for peace in Ukraine means compromising on human rights and democratic values. While it may seem like a cop-out, it is important to play the long game and focus on ending the war on terms acceptable to Kyiv. In the future, justice can be pursued, but right now, peace must be the overriding priority.
Recommended reading:
– Eugene Rumer warns that the west is likely headed for a new cold war-style stand-off with Russia in Foreign Affairs magazine.
– Julia Ioffe argues that Putin’s position may be reinforced after Prigozhin’s coup attempt in her “post-coup report”.
– There are concerns about the plodding approach to Ukraine’s counteroffensive, but Ukraine’s top military officer refuses to let criticism affect him.
Pilita’s response:
I believe that peace in Ukraine may require difficult choices, and recent events have made me more concerned about what lies ahead. Prigozhin’s coup attempt showed the enthusiasm of the crowds and raised concerns about the future leadership of a post-Putin Russia. However, it is too soon to determine whether a post-Putin Russia would be led by someone like an erratic warlord or an Alexei Navalny.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
