When citizens of the Old Continent were watching the matches of the 2012 UEFA European Championship in Ukraine and Poland during the hot summer, few could have predicted that, just two years later, some of those locations would turn into war zones.
At that time, Ukraine, together with Poland, was seen as a promising economic tiger of Eastern Europe, thanks to its large population, natural resources, and strategic location. However, that perception was wrong. Ukraine soon stepped onto the path of unrest and war, not prosperity. Cities like Donetsk and Kharkiv, where matches of the largest European football tournament were held in 2012, became battlegrounds during 2014. That year, the control of Kiev and pro-Russian separatists changed violently in several instances as part of the war in Eastern Ukraine.
Ignoring the Ukrainian Puzzle
Over time, starting from 2016, the war in Donbas decreased in intensity and casualties, but it continued, though it was no longer of interest to mainstream global media. In the years before the pandemic, no permanent solution to the Ukrainian crisis was sought in Brussels, London, or Washington. Instead, the focus shifted to sanctions and attempts to isolate Moscow. Western power centers simply did not grasp the seriousness of the Ukrainian issue. Ignoring the problem does not mean it disappears. On the contrary, the situation only worsened, as seen in the example of the war in Donbas.
The Ukrainian Crisis Threatens Humanity
Ukraine became the number one global issue only after the subsequent Russian military invasion in February 2022. The Ukrainian crisis turned into the biggest global crisis since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. The crisis at the “edge of Europe” has, more than any other, threatened the outbreak of World War III, possibly with nuclear consequences. Due to the risk of escalation into direct conflict between Russia and NATO, the war in Ukraine poses a threat to all of humanity, as a potential nuclear war could push humanity back to prehistoric times. Albert Einstein’s famous quote comes to mind: “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
Despite the enormous danger to humanity, the West (the US and the European Union) and the East (Russia and China) and their partners have failed to find a reasonable, compromise, functional, and sustainable solution to extinguish the raging Ukrainian crisis over three years of war. This is the greatest failure of the international community in the 21st century. Any decent student of diplomacy, international relations, and history could have concluded from the start of the Ukrainian crisis in 2014, or at the latest from the onset of the most intense war in 2022, that the definitive solution to the Russian-Ukrainian war would be solely diplomatic or political.
The Futile Suffering of Millions
The war that has already claimed hundreds of thousands of lives (with estimates reaching half a million), left more than 100,000 people disabled, displaced 8 million Ukrainians, and caused Ukraine severe material damage (from $500 to $750 billion) is nothing but a consequence of a political disagreement between Ukraine and Russia. The war in Ukraine is a political war, and it will eventually be resolved by political, i.e., diplomatic means. A compromise solution will also be a Ukrainian solution. This will not be a novelty, as about 40 percent of wars in history have ended with some form of a compromise agreement. The specificity of the Ukrainian case will be that third parties will have a role in the agreement. Due to the poor relationship between the Russians and Ukrainians and the abundant Western support for Ukraine, formally neutral countries like the US will play an important role in the definitive solution.
Frozen Frontlines Without a Definite Winner
The political-military situation in the Ukrainian war has long gone in the direction of diplomacy. This is largely because neither side can defeat the other. Russia took Crimea without firing a shot in 2014, and in the civil war between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainian forces, the separatists took much of Donetsk and Luhansk regions. During its invasion, Russia managed to create a land corridor from Crimea through southeastern Ukraine to western Russia. Russian forces largely occupied the regions of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. In September 2022, Russia annexed these four regions and incorporated them into its constitution. Although in the fall of that year, the Ukrainian army retook parts of Kharkiv and Kherson regions, Ukraine’s major offensive in the summer of 2023 completely failed.
Since then, the situation on the front lines has largely stabilized, with small Russian gains. Russia has occupied about 20 percent of Ukrainian territory. Despite intense fighting, neither side has been able to find a formula to effectively break the defense of the other. Why? Mainly due to drones, advanced air defense systems, trench warfare tactics, constant battlefield surveillance, and limited maneuvering space, which makes capturing territory extremely difficult.
The End of the Illusion of a Ukrainian Triumph
The arrival of the Trump administration at the beginning of this year marked the point when the US would no longer finance Ukraine’s war efforts indefinitely. The West has invested around $400 billion, but the Ukrainians cannot carry out their “Operation Storm” and liberate the country because they lack the knowledge, ability, and ideas for such a feat. The Ukrainian armed forces are exhausted in terms of personnel, logistically overloaded, and increasingly dependent on foreign assistance, which further diminishes their ability to carry out any decisive offensive. Despite the grand rhetoric, European NATO member states cannot assist Ukraine’s war machine in the long term without US support. Europeans are dealing with issues of limited ammunition supplies, insufficient military industry capacities, and dependence on US military, intelligence, and logistical support. Given such circumstances, the war can only be resolved at the diplomatic table.
Freezing the Frontlines
The ultimate resolution to the Ukrainian crisis, which could come in the next months and years, will be a compromise and not overly innovative. One should not blindly adhere to solutions that have surfaced in the media in recent days, allegedly proposed by the Trump administration. If the logic of international relations in the 21st century is applied (especially the logic of Putin’s Russia, war-torn Ukraine, and a divided NATO), it is easy to reach conclusions. First and foremost, the principle of freezing the frontlines will be applied, with each side holding on to their own with some minor concessions. This is the strategic way of thinking supported by both the Russian and American administrations.
Due to the specific status of the Crimean Peninsula, it is possible that the US, some Western countries, and many neutral countries in good relations with Russia will de jure recognize Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Unlike Crimea, it is unlikely that the US and the international community will formally recognize Russia’s control over the four formally Ukrainian regions. However, freezing the frontlines will result in Russia de facto retaining Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. These regions, by decree of Putin, entered Russia’s constitution and must remain under Russian control. This is a matter of Russian national pride, regardless of who is in power.
Territorial Concessions
Since Russian forces do not control 100 percent of the territory in these four regions within their administrative borders, it is likely that Ukraine will be able to retain the smaller parts it controls. It is less probable, but still possible, that Ukrainian forces will have to completely leave these areas in favor of Russia. As for small pieces of Russian territory controlled by Ukrainian forces (pockets within the Belgorod and Kursk regions), Ukraine will have to withdraw from these areas. These are internationally recognized Russian territories. Ukrainians cannot expect the West, upon which their future depends, to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty if Kyiv does not respect the integrity and sovereignty of Russia. Something similar could happen with smaller parts of the Kharkiv region of Ukraine controlled by Russian forces. These forces may have to pull out from these pockets.
Ukraine Becomes a Neutral State
Vladimir Putin stated that the main reason for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was to prevent Kyiv from joining NATO. Russia’s aim to prevent Ukraine’s NATO membership was the driving force behind the Russian-Ukrainian war, and this condition must be met for Russia to cease its military actions. The final agreement between NATO (read the US) and Russia will have to explicitly state that Ukraine cannot become a NATO member in any form. Ukraine will have to be permanently neutral, i.e., a non-aligned state without nuclear weapons. Something like Austria. In return, powerful Western states like the US, the UK, and France will provide the new Ukraine with security guarantees for its territorial integrity and sovereignty. These are reasonable conditions that were on the table during the Russia-Ukraine talks in Turkey in March 2022. Unfortunately, these talks failed, mainly due to the involvement of the Biden administration, which promised significant military aid to Kyiv.
BRICS Observers
As for the European Union, Russia never made any demands. Therefore, Kyiv could continue its path toward membership in this organization. Since Russia is a superpower, there is no chance that UN blue helmets will be deployed in Crimea or the Ukrainian regions occupied by Russia. On the front lines in Eastern Ukraine, non-combat observers from neutral countries, actually BRICS member states like China, India, South Africa, and Brazil, could be involved. This mission could take place within the BRICS framework, but certainly not within the UN. To ensure peace, some areas will need to be demilitarized, and heavy weapons will need to be withdrawn to a certain distance.
Protection of Human Rights and Minorities
The final solution must fully ensure human rights and the rights of minorities. The rights of the Russian minority on Ukrainian-controlled territory, as well as the rights of the Ukrainian minority on Russian-controlled territory, must be guaranteed, as well as the rights of Tatars, Rusyns, Greeks, Jews, and other minorities. All displaced persons must have the opportunity to return to their homes.
Lifting of Sanctions and the Return of Trade
In the economic part of the peace agreement, sanctions imposed mainly by Western countries will have to be lifted from Russia. Corporations from Europe and the US cannot afford to ignore the Russian market due to its valuable natural resources, vast consumer base, and geostrategic importance. Additionally, there is increased pressure from competition from China, India, and other countries that have not imposed sanctions and are filling the gaps left by Western companies. In fact, some Western companies have already returned to Russia, such as McDonald’s, which was rebranded as Vkusno-i Tochka, and Starbucks, which has transformed into Stars Coffee. As strange as it sounds, Russia is a much more economically valuable partner to the US and European countries than Ukraine, due to its oil, gas, and other raw materials, a market of over 140 million people, and its strategic importance in global supply chains.
The Black and Azov Seas and Ukrainian territory (especially the Dnieper River) will be able to facilitate free trade and commerce between Russia, Ukraine, and the rest of the world. This will require strong security guarantees, international monitoring of shipping routes, and the infrastructural reconstruction of devastated Black Sea ports and logistics networks. All of this will be necessary to re-establish a stable trade route crucial for global supplies of grain, energy, and raw materials. Turkey will play an important role here as a key power in the Black Sea and a partner of both Kyiv and Moscow.
Infrastructure Reconstruction
The peace agreement will have to include specific measures for the reconstruction of the destroyed infrastructure on both the Ukrainian side and possibly the Russian side of the demarcation line. This would involve financial assistance from international organizations and private corporations. The reconstruction of infrastructure will also need international monitoring and coordination to ensure fair distribution of resources and prevent corruption during the rebuilding process.
The proposed solutions to the Ukrainian crisis are not revolutionary, and that is the greatest tragedy of all. The problem is that everything could have been negotiated without war, suffering, deaths, injuries, and maiming. However, better late than never.
.jpg)
