Civilizational values come to the fore in Ukraine

Civilizational values are at the heart of the conflict in Ukraine and none other than UN chief Antonio Guterres broached the principal challenge before the invaders of the country when he called on them to stop the incursion ‘in the name of humanity’. Humanity or loving-kindness and compassion, markers of a civilized conscience, are indeed the gut issues in Ukraine because it is the citizenry of that country that is suffering most, as is plain to see.

People around the world will be judged on the basis of the humanity with which they respond to the suffering of ordinary Ukrainians. In other words, they would stand or fall as civilized humans in proportion to which they respond positively to the promptings of their consciences on this crisis and the issues growing out of it. And enabling Ukrainian citizens to live with dignity is a prime prompting.

If it is agreed that bringing relief and a measure of happiness to the ordinary citizens of Ukraine and respecting their rights are among the most urgent tasks at hand, looking for what are considered historical justifications for the invasion is inapposite and meaningless. They are barren exercises that serve no useful purpose currently and smack of fork-tongued gibberish since many of these sections of opinion, and they are strongly prevalent in Sri Lanka, also recognize the Russian offensive for what it is: an invasion of Ukraine and a gross violation of the latter’s sovereignty. If the latter is accepted by them to be true, elaborate excursions into history at present take on the character of diversionary prattle. Besides, these commentators project themselves as apologists for the invasion.

No doubt, the authoritarian Russian state is not the only invader of countries in contemporary times who have helped spawn unbearable misery for ordinary people who have had nothing to do with the confrontational struggles of major powers in international politics. President Putin had the historical precedents of the Western invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, to take just two examples from the past two decades, that, among other things, stood International Law on its head as it were. As pointed out in this column last week, it is perhaps the impunity with which the US and its allies engaged in their military invasions and misadventures in the South that emboldened President Putin to invade Ukraine.

However, civilian suffering anywhere ought to shake consciences. If this does not occur sufficiently, we are left with the inescapable conclusion that consciences have been steadily deadened as a result of continuous bloodletting the world over and this bodes ill for the future of humanity. Fortunately, the UN has taken the lead in trying to awaken consciences to their prime responsibilities and the hope of humanists is that the call of the UN chief would prove effective.

The fact that Russian and Ukrainian state delegations have been in talks indicates that both sides have taken careful note of the heavy costs that both sides would be called upon to endure in the event of a further prolongation of the conflict. It may appear, at first blush, that Russia is in a position to hold the whip hand over the Ukrainian forces indefinitely but there is no guarantee that this would necessarily be so. First, the morale of the Ukrainian forces is at present high. Second, Ukraine is heavily and steadfastly backed by the West in many vital areas, including arms supplies.

The indications are that the West, with the UK and the EU too figuring in a big way, would not be faltering in the provision of such support for the foreseeable future and this could lead to a military stalemate on the ground. Russia would do well to recall to mind its Afghan experience which threw up the lesson that a prolonged military stalemate is really a victory for the adversary. Besides, with time Western economic sanctions are likely to kick in and this could lead to the steady weakening of the Russian economy. In other words, this conflict is unlikely to feature an easy winner.

However, what is also certain is that as long as the armed conflict lasts, Ukrainian civilians’ suffering would be prolonged. Likewise, the ordinary citizenry of Russia would suffer as well, as a result of Western economic sanctions taking effect, leading to a no-win situation for both sides. The ruble’s tumble is a pointer to worse times ahead for the Russian people.

Accordingly, the sides to the conflict need to explore the possibility of declaring a ceasefire. In the short term, emotions need to cool and a cessation of hostilities is the way to achieve it. Deliberations on the gut issues in the conflict would need to be taken up next. However, when the latter stage is reached, a sense of realism needs to take hold in both quarters. For example, the partitioning of the Ukraine on ethnic grounds is unlikely to be permitted by the Ukrainian state. But governing mechanisms that will satisfy both sides are possible to be worked out and the Baltic states offer some examples of such workable solutions.

It would be plainly foolish for Russia to raise the possibility of a nuclear strike. Retaliatory strikes by Russia’s adversaries with like weapons would trigger large-scale devastation for the world. These considerations should render the nuclear option unthinkable. Mature leadership is needed on both sides of the divide to work out a fair negotiated settlement.

It would be correct to say that with the Ukrainian crisis, the world has come very close to another world war. Even if the world manages to ward off a major war in Europe, it will be left nursing the scars and cleavages from this crisis for a long time to come. The adversarial sides would need to talk constructively to each other for a considerable period to heal the wounds opened by the Ukrainian conflict.

Hopefully, the US and Russia would sooner rather than later get down to talking in earnest on how the rifts opened by this conflict could be healed. Simultaneously, the silent majority or the ordinary people on both sides of the divide, whose one wish is likely to be peace, would need to impress on their ruling elites that war is clearly not the way forward.