by Domenico Maceri * –
SAN LUIS OBISPO (USA). “The United States should be a force for world peace.” That’s the headline of an open letter published in the New York Times and signed by fifteen former national security experts, all part of the Eisenhower Media Network (EMN), who have held high-level roles in Democratic and Republican administrations. The letter characterizes the war between Russia and Ukraine as a political and economic disaster that could lead to dangerous uses of nuclear weapons. Dennis Fritz, director of the EMN, explained in an interview with the Democracy Now television network that the intent of the letter is to get the attention of President Joe Biden and Congress to end the war.
However, Biden seems to be deaf and continues to send weapons to Ukraine while some weak peace attempts emerge from several countries without however receiving support from the Americans. Starting with China, perhaps the most formidable adversary for the United States, which has already demonstrated the skills of peacemaker between Iran and Saudi Arabia. In fact, the two Middle Eastern countries, bitter enemies, were convinced by China to get closer and reopen their respective embassies. This approach augurs a probable end to the war in Yemen. China has indeed had a positive influence and further moves are expected to stabilize the Middle East while Western influence has proved to be less effective. Moreover, China has tried to push in the right direction in the war in Ukraine. President Xi Jinping traveled to Russia for talks with Vladimir Putin and then had a telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Nothing concrete has come to light but China has presented a peaceful face, at the same time creating very useful allies since the United States sees the Asian country as threatening.
Brazil has also moved in a peaceful direction on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva (Lula) condemned Russia’s territorial encroachment on Ukraine even as he said both countries were responsible for the war. Lula also suggested that Russia should withdraw its military from the territories it invaded last year but that Ukraine should accept the loss of Crimea, which Russia invaded in 2014. Ukraine didn’t take long to disagree with the suggestions by Lula.
Six African countries led by Southern Africa have also promoted an initiative through which African representatives would meet separately with Russian and Ukrainian counterparts to begin diplomatic discussions that could lead to a truce and possible peace. Neither Russia nor Ukraine has rejected the African initiative.
However, America and Europe have spent little energy to promote peace which according to the Russians is distanced from the supply of arms to the Ukrainians. Obviously they forget that it was they who attacked their neighbor, making their accounts very bad. Putin envisaged a blitzkrieg in which President Zelensky would flee and the country would become a vassal state with a new leader friendly to Russia. The Russian leader made a mistake, but not only the Ukrainians but also the Russian soldiers paid the price. The number of dead, not completely accurate, tells us that 350,000 Russian and Ukrainian soldiers were injured or lost their lives, mostly Russians. In addition, 13 million Ukrainians have been uprooted from their homes, 8 million scattered throughout Europe and 5 million scattered throughout the interior of the country. These displaced people tell us something about the cause of the war, which is Russian aggression.
The supply of arms by the USA and Europe obviously prolongs the war but this is also due to the determination of the Ukrainians to defend their country. The Russian invasion’s attempt to bend Ukraine has led to a kind of stalemate that prevents obvious peaceful solutions. In the end, however, if the peace initiatives are successful, they will be dictated in a certain way by what happens on the battlefields and the way in which the two adversaries will be able to paint the reality of the facts.
Until now Biden has armed the Ukrainians and has even given the green light for the transfer of F-15 and F-16 jets by European countries, obtaining the promise that they would be used only for defensive purposes. In fact, Zelensky knows very well that incursions into Russian territory are not only dangerous from the point of view of Russian reactions but also because they would endanger the flow of weapons from the West. These weapons will be indispensable for the announced Ukrainian counter-offensive to be implemented shortly. Even in the event of Ukrainian successes a complete defeat of Russia is not in the assumptions. Putin may be upping the ante as the recent transfer of tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus suggests. There will be no clear winners or clear losers. It will take some crisis for Biden to convince the Ukrainians that to achieve peace they will have to concede something to Putin. The Russian leader needs to prove that the deaths of his soldiers do not appear in vain for the war he unleashed. At the moment, however, Biden is facing the crisis of default that could be triggered by Republican intransigence on raising the public debt ceiling, causing very serious problems for the American economy and inevitably also for the global one. Without a similar crisis in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the US president is unlikely to put pressure on Zelensky to negotiate.
* Domenico Maceri, PhD, is professor emeritus at Allan Hancock College, Santa Maria, California. Some of his articles have won awards from the National Association of Hispanic Publications.
