The Financial Times newspaper reported that Moscow and Kiev are working on a fifteen-point agreement, among them Ukraine’s neutrality and a limitation of its military forces and weapons, in exchange for an immediate ceasefire and the withdrawal of Russian troops from the Ukrainian territory. If this agreement were reached, it would mean accepting the proposal on the same terms that some of us did to prevent war before it broke out.
This would give rise to the old adage that no saddlebags were needed for such a journey and that much destruction and death could have been avoided. But it was necessary to demonstrate that the West was capable of cornering the threat, based on a muscular Atlantic deterrent. Too bad Ukraine bought this fiction with enthusiasm only to end up paying the bill for stubborn reality.
Military observers point out that, in any case, the end of armed hostilities would only come before a month or two. Meanwhile, attacks are likely to intensify. When the ceasefire is stabilized, both sides will make a clearly positive balance in their favor. They will say that all military objectives have been achieved. It is even possible that they exhibit important partial victories.
Russia could argue that it stopped NATO’s advance towards its borders, that it consolidated its possession of Crimea and the expansion of territories in Donbass, that it managed to show its offensive capabilities in Kiev and Kharkiv, among other things. In turn, Ukraine will show that the vast majority of the territory remains in its hands, that it has kept some important capitals intact, such as Lviv, and may even have managed to prevent Kiev from falling into Russian hands.
In reality, if the military situation does not change much in the next few weeks, the most realistic balance will reflect that the outcome of the military confrontation ended in a draw. Russia did not achieve a quick victory as it had intended, which included capturing the Ukrainian government, and had to change strategy several times in light of the logistical needs of a slower advance and unexpected resistance from the Ukrainian military and population.
In turn, Ukraine has begun to prove that the enclosure of cities subjects its population to excessive suffering, which could be avoided if the war were stopped, and which will not be able to reach Russia enough for it to abandon its territory. His desperate petition to Western countries to close their airspace is made in the knowledge that Russia has not yet utilized its strategic strength, something that could change the course of the war, multiplying the destruction of its cities.
It seems plausible that this military tie will result in the true balance that will occur when the end of the war arrives, if the forecasts suggested by the Financial Times about a forthcoming agreement are fulfilled. Certainly, given the imbalance of forces between the two contenders, all the credit goes to Ukraine. Using a football simile, it’s as if a third division team tied with the champions of the Champions League.
However, this situation will change quickly when the post-war period begins. Russia will not be able to hide that its “special operation” did not have the liberating meaning it intended (with the exception of the pro-Russian eastern provinces), but quite the contrary: the military punishment provoked resentment in the Ukrainian population, which often translates into in open hate. The wounds produced will not heal easily and should strengthen Ukrainian society’s sense of identity.
On the other hand, the process of rebuilding the Ukrainian country will have massive support from Western governments. Perhaps much more than the Marshall Plan meant for Europe after the Second World War. It is possible that this reconstruction will have a decisive effect on Ukraine itself.
As is well known, the European Union’s reluctance to accept an express incorporation of Kiev into Community Europe has its roots in the visible weaknesses and irregularities in Ukraine’s institutional framework. It may be that the massive support of the EU and the United States for reconstruction is conditional on internal modernization and the elimination of the proverbial corruption that affects Ukrainian institutions.
In short, while Ukraine regains relative normalcy, that country’s economic and political resurgence is likely to be considerable. Considering that the Russian attacker has to spend a lot of time licking his wounds, it cannot be ruled out that the effects of the war will have greater negative impacts on Moscow than Putin was able to imagine.
