The war in Ukraine

The reasons for this war’s outbreak are very complex and its reasons resonate in different layers of history. Opposing sides put forward different eras and events attributing different weights to their applicable relevance. One could go centuries back, highlight the world wars, concentrate on the Soviet Union’s lifespan and fall or focus on the very real wider power struggle that has been playing out on Ukrainian soil during the time since.

Regardless of one’s perspective they could all hold perceived truth as well as falsehood. I will not entangle myself in the, for the moment, unsolvable. My aim is to convey some observations and to add value. I do so well aware that my effort at a balanced perspective is vulnerable to attack from all sides. After reading my text, no one with any stake in this tragedy will be content.

First, I must state the irrefutable fact that Russia invaded Ukraine both in 2014 and in 2022. This applies to the, at that point of time, internationally recognized borders of Ukraine.

Secondly, Ukraine has since the fall of the Soviet Union and especially during the last two decades been the staging ground of intense geopolitical competition waged by intelligence agencies from the former East and West, with Russia and the US being the deciding actors. In 2014 this conflict transferred from a gray to a green war because one side perceived they had no other option. This holds wider ramifications.

Thirdly, for well over a year the war has grinded to a halt. The front has not moved in any way besides a few miles here and there. In that sense the war constitutes a meaningless carnage where tens of thousands of humans have meaninglessly died echoing the trench warfare of the First World War. The harsh reality that the war is a staging point for a larger struggle means, in this case, that a decisive victory for any party is highly unlikely. It saddens me to write this but the outbreak of this war had in many minds far larger prospects beyond Ukrainian national survival. Almost none of them have been realised and in my opinion the assessments they relied on were simply not accurate. There were never enough chips on the table to give Ukraine a decisive victory over Russia in a war of attrition. My assessment since before the war is that it should have been avoided in the first place and that it constitutes a long-term strategic mistake from NATO’s and the wider West's perspective. My assessment is also that these strategic mistakes were caused by an inability to lift the perspective from the local vested challenges to the larger global one. This can in certain ways be likened to the folly of resources and efforts spent on the war on terrorism and the inability to timely refocus from it. From a strategic perspective China views this era as a gift from heaven.

Fourthly, the war in Ukraine constitutes a tragedy where fraternal people are killing each other in an unacceptable number and definitely so viewed from gains on the ground. The russian war fatalities are also mounting and are for them causing concern. With that said there is no indication of a short-term collapse and they have a population almost 100 million greater than Ukraine. Without the direct involvement of NATO soldiers, accompanied by an extreme risk of nuclear war and a third world war, the conflict will have to be settled through negotiations.

Fifthly, there are no good options left. A just peace is beyond reach. This war has instigated chaos and changed the global geopolitical landscape for a long period forward. It has, for example, cemented relations between Russia and China and it has from the West's perspective had reverberating negative strategic effects throughout the world, not least in Asia.

When the Soviet Union fell the spear was thrust far deeper than what would have been enough for the kill. Instead of creating a long-term beneficial situation the dance on the graves was prioritized. This made a hell of a mess that is still causing problems and conflict around the world. It also has implications in the Ukraine situation. Tactical wins have been allowed to overshadow strategic gains.

With a just peace beyond reach, the least bad option is a lasting peace. Such a peace must be built around a framework that makes it impossible for any nation to break it without unacceptable military and economic consequences. Borders for such peace should be drawn with the support of physical barriers such as rivers and other terrain. Linguistic demographics should also not be disregarded. At the same time the “not one inch” of de facto NATO territory will have to be emphasized and, in an Article 5 scenario, be enforced at any cost.

Let us not repeat the mistakes made with the fall of the Soviet Union. Let us thrust the spear just deep enough. Any great leader would. History will agree.

Update 2024-06-21: Updated language for clarity

Update 2026-08-22: Corrected grammar and spelling (going through old posts using a new tool). The content of the text was not changed in any way.