A path to peace in the war in Ukraine

? ??The war in Ukraine should never have started. This dramatic event that has destabilized the entire world has once again reminded the numerous wars that have taken place in Europe, including two world wars with a huge number of wounded and deaths people and immense destruction of almost all European countries. In most wars, no single country can be singled out as solely responsible, although there may be one that has started it. The war in Ukraine is not an exception. Nobody questions that Russia is the invading country but is not the only one responsible for the war in Ukraine. Other countries also have a high responsibility in this war because they intentionally ignored the multiple Russian warnings about the rapid deterioration of the internal situation in the country due to their active participation in supporting the opposition forces that ended up staging a coup d’état in 2014, and because of their support of the Ukrainian government in the civil war?developed in the Donbas region after the failure of the Minks agreements. The Donbas civil war between pro-Russian militia and the Ukrainian army could have also been avoided if the Ukrainian government had fully complied with its obligations under the Minks agreements and if the other participants had also fully complied with their own obligations and commitments assumed in the framework of the agreements mentioned above.

?????The war in Ukraine has its own special characteristics. These characteristics are the following:

·????????It is an indirect war between the US, openly supported by NATO, the EU, and other US allied countries on one side, and Russia, supported not so openly by a small group of countries, on the other side;

·????????On the battlefield, it is a war between the Russian and Ukrainian armies on Ukrainian territory and later also in part of this territory annexed by Russia;

·????????In this war, one of the parties, Russia, does not participate with all its armed forces but with a limited part of its military potential, supported by private groups and pro-Russian militias from the regions annexed by Russia. This is the reason why the Russian government calls it a "Special military operation." The other part, Ukraine, is participating with its full armed forces supported by foreign volunteers from different countries and other groups of fighters.

????When a war begins, all countries seek a complete military victory; this means a full defeat of the enemy. The Ukrainian government has repeatedly stated that it seeks a military victory against Russia and is fighting to achieve this war objective with the military and financial support of the US, NATO, the EU, and other allies.

Development of military operations on the battlefield

????Since the beginning of the Russian "Special military operation" in Ukraine on February 24, 2022, two different moments can be identified in the development of military operations on the ground. During the first months of the war, a clear advance of the Russian troops on several fronts in the north, east, and south of the country were reported by the Russian and Ukrainian authorities, the US, the UK, and other western countries, international and national newspapers, and by Russian international and national newspapers and news. During this period, despite the occasional withdrawal of Russian troops from the occupied territories in the north of the country, particularly from the Kyiv region and some other areas along the front line in the east and south of the country, the Russian army always singled out that the so-called "Special military operations" were carried out according to the plan approved.

????Suddenly, the advance of the Russian troops in the north stopped, and they retreated from the area near Kyiv, relocating them to the east and south of the country. During this period, the Russian army carried out the major offensives operations reported by the authorities of both sides, by the western and Russian media, and by other public sources, while the number of the Ukrainian army's offensive operations was limited for different reasons. One of these reasons is the insufficient offensives weapons available in the Ukrainian army for carrying out these military operations.

????During the latest weeks of the war, the Ukrainian armed forces took the initiative, forcing the Russian troops to withdraw from the Kharkiv region in the east. Some advances of the Ukrainian armed forces were also reported in the Donetsk, Lugansk, and Mykolaiv regions located in the east part of the country. In the south, the Ukrainian army launched another offensive in the Jerson region and occupied their capital city after the retreat of the Russian troops. This regional capital city was captured at the beginning of the war by the Russian army and was the only one occupied by Russia until November 2022. Undoubtedly, the retrieval of Russian troops from several places in the east and south of the frontline raised the morale of the Ukrainian troops and changed the war's course. But the victories of the Ukrainian army in the north and south of the country and the retreat of the Russian troops from these areas during the past days could give a wrong impression about the final overcome of the war.

????Could the Ukrainian armed forces win this war and expel all Russian troops from the Ukrainian territory, including the Crimea Peninsula, the Donbas, Zaporiyia, and Jerson regions? According to many analysts, politicians, and military experts, Ukraine does not have the resources and the amount of offensive weapons to win this war against Russia, even with the military and financial support of the US, NATO, and the EU and the limited units of the Russian professional army involved in the war.

????Senator Dick Black for Virginia and a former high-ranking officer in the US armed forces, with experience in combat operations, in an intervention at the Schiller Institute, confirmed that, in his opinion, the Ukrainian armed forces could not win this war. In his comments on this issue, Senator Black expressed the following:

·????????The stock of ammunition and equipment of Russian origin in the hands of the Ukrainian army is running out, and the shipments of these items from NATO countries are now limited;

·????????Russia fires 50,000 shells daily, ten times more than the Ukrainian army fires in the same period;

·????????The casualties of the Ukrainian army are 1,000 per day, of which 200 are dead soldiers. The casualty rate has doubled in just three weeks. The US lost 60,000 soldiers in ten years in the Vietnam war, equivalent to an average of 6,000 soldiers per year. The Ukrainian army loses 6,000 soldiers per month, 12 times higher than the US casualty rate in the Vietnam war. Ukraine, with a much smaller population of around 43 million, almost five times less than the US population, could soon face difficulty replacing the number of soldiers who died within the army, which is 60 times greater than the number of casualties reported by the US during the Vietnam war.

Possibilities of a military victory

????After carefully studying the evolution of the war in Ukraine, the following question needs an answer: what are the possibilities for one of the parties to military win the war in Ukraine? There are three possibilities. The first one is that the Ukrainian army, through more offensive operations, pushes the Russian troops outside the Ukrainian territory now under Russian occupation. However, this does not mean that the war is over. Why? Because Russia could decide to attack the country again with fresh troops or in a full-scale war. For this reason, there is still a need to negotiate a lasting peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine to avoid another war between them.

????The second possibility is that Russia win the war and kept control of the Ukrainian territory annexed by Russia, including the Crimea Peninsula, the Donbas, Zaporiyia, and Jerson regions. This could happen if Russia declares a full war against Ukraine or significantly increases the troops on the ground and the military equipment of all kinds, except strategic weapons. The key issue associated with this possibility is to define the price the Ukrainian government is willing to pay for reaching a ceasefire arrangement and an agreement for lasting peace with Russia for at least the next ten years.

????The third possibility is that the development of the military operations on the ground does not give any of the parties a strategic advantage that allows it to militarily win the war. This possibility is an option in the understanding that Russia decides not to go to full-scale war against Ukraine or increase the number of troops and equipment significantly under the so-called "Special military operation" to change the war's course. In this case, because none of the parties are in a position to defeat the enemy, there is an urgent need to begin negotiations for a ceasefire arrangement and, later, for a lasting peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine. This possibility better reflects the military situation on the battlefield right now.

Change in the US position

????Due to the development of the war in the last days, the pressure of several US politicians, the public opinion, and the economic and energy crises affecting the US, the EU, and other Western country's economies, and considering the possibility that the Ukrainian army could not win the war from the military point of view, governments of these countries are requesting the Ukrainian and the Russian governments to begin negotiations of a ceasefire arrangement to stop the fighting and later to adopt a lasting peace agreement to end the war and to impede another one in the future. If the US, the leading NATO military force, is not willing to enter the war in Ukraine directly, and this scenario is until now out of all US and NATO plans, then the possibility for the Ukrainian army to win this war militarily and recover the territory now under Russian control using its military forces is extremely low, and for many experts almost impossible to achieve. At the same time, it will be exceedingly difficult for the Ukrainian government to maintain the current pace of the war, even with the US, the EU, and NATO assistance, particularly if the war lasts a long period and Russia decides to keep the territories occupied during the war at all costs.

Importance of beginning a negotiation process for a ceasefire and the end of the war

????Based on what has been said above, the main objective of the Ukrainian and Russian governments should be not to continue the war indefinitely but, with the participation of the United Nations and other countries, to begin negotiations on a ceasefire arrangement to stop the fighting as soon as possible. After reaching a ceasefire arrangement, Ukraine and Russia representatives, with the participation of the United Nations and other countries, should begin negotiating a lasting peace agreement to end the war and impede another one in the future.

????The US proposal, submitted in the name of the western group and Ukraine, intends to explore with Russia the possibility of beginning a negotiation of a ceasefire arrangement and, later, the negotiations of a lasting peace agreement to end the war in Ukraine. Russia has already rejected the US proposal. The reason for Russia's rejection of the US proposal is because it included terms and conditions for Russia's surrender, the demilitarization of the Crimea Peninsula, and the return to Ukraine of the occupied territories of the Donbas, Zaporiyia, and Jerson regions, to mention only a few points of the proposal mentioned above. It is important to stress that the initial conditions mentioned by Presidents Putin and Zelenski to stop the war are still far away and include conditions already rejected by Russia and Ukraine.

????However, what is more worrying is that none of the parties have, for the time being, the political will to change some of their initial conditions regarding key issues to be discussed at the negotiation table. Due to the tense relationship that exists between Russia on the one hand and Ukraine, the US, NATO, the EU, and other US allied countries on the other, and in order to guarantee the success of the ceasefire negotiations, Russia and Ukraine must show the greatest possible flexibility in considering the other party's proposals, always thinking of the Ukrainian people subjected to a war that has radically changed their lives negatively.

????Why are the negotiations of a ceasefire arrangement so important now? Because the war is escalating in a dangerous manner with an increased combat intensity on the ground, an alarming level of destruction of the country's infrastructure, and a high number of civilians killed and displaced among different countries. Due to the situation on the ground, the war could get out of control and turn into a confrontation between NATO and Russia or between the US and Russia, but if this happens, then it would force NATO to intervene.

????In the opinion of several analysts, politicians, and military experts, the war is reaching an inflection point. This means that the number of Ukrainian troops deployed and the military equipment in their hands are insufficient to defeat the Russian army. The same can be said regarding the possibility of the Russian troops defeating the Ukrainian army with the limited number of soldiers and equipment now available for this purpose. However, it is important to note that Russia has sufficient military troops and equipment to defeat the Ukrainian army if it decides to go to a full-scale war against the country. But the declaration by the Russian government of a full-scale war against Ukraine could provoke an international reaction against Russia that it would not be in the country's interest to confront this situation right now.

???The main objectives to be reached by a ceasefire arrangement is, among others, the following:

·????????To stop the fighting and the increasing number of civilian and military personnel injured and killed, and the destruction of the country's infrastructure;

·????????To stop the supply of military equipment to Ukraine's army by the US and NATO;

·????????To delimit the front line, the establishment of a demilitarized zone along the front line, the type of defensive weapons, and the number of troops to be deployed in this zone;

·????????To allow the provision of humanitarian assistance to the Ukrainian and Russian citizens living in cities and towns in Ukraine territory and the occupied zones by Russia without the regular supply of water, electricity, heating, food, and medicines;

·????????To exchange war prisoners;

·????????To define the possible role of the United Nations in supervising the implementation of the ceasefire arrangement.

????The US, the EU, the Ukraine, and NATO representatives are discussing the strategy to be adopted on the urgent need to begin negotiations for a ceasefire and, later, for a lasting peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine. This is, without a doubt, an important step in the right direction. However, it is important to know the reasons behind the new US position regarding the war in Ukraine because it is well known that the Ukraine representatives left the negotiation table in March this year following US recommendations. Based on public sources close to the US government, the US and NATO representatives in public will continue insisting on a possible Ukrainian military victory over Russia on the battlefield. This position will allow the US, the EU, and NATO representatives to ask for more resources to assist Ukraine in achieving this goal and defeating Russia on the battlefield, something that several western politicians want. However, in private, they will indicate that they cannot assure that the Ukrainian army could defeat the Russian army in this war.

???At the same time, the US representatives in private will insist that President Zelenski stop openly rejecting the idea of a possible negotiation process with President Putin to end the war and show some flexibility on this issue. Why should the Ukrainian government adopt this position now, after months of insisting that he has nothing to discuss with President Putin? The answer to this question is the following: many US and EU citizens are requesting that their governments withdraw all sanctions against Russia, adopt all necessary measures to stop the war in Ukraine, and significantly reduce Ukraine's financial and military assistance provided by their governments. They are also requesting their government to use these resources to help their citizens and business people to overcome the economic and energy crises affecting their economies and life as consequences of the war in Ukraine.

????Undoubtedly, the negotiations of a ceasefire should be a priority for Ukraine, Russia, the US, the EU, and NATO representatives, the main parties involved in the war in Ukraine. Why? Because the countries directly involved in the war, this means Russia and Ukraine do not have sufficient troops and equipment on the ground to defeat the other, and because the war in Ukraine is significantly affecting not only the economy of Ukraine and Russia but also the economies of other countries close to Ukrainian borders, the US, the EU, and many others in all regions of the world. All these countries are affected by deep economic and energy crises, high inflation, and high prices of food, basic products, and raw materials. Most countries implementing the sanctions approved by the US and the EU against Russia and providing financial and military assistance to Ukraine are now under severe economic and energy crises and social unrest.

????After agreeing on a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, their representatives and the US and NATO representatives, with the participation of United Nations representatives, among others, should carry out negotiations on a lasting peace agreement to end the war and to maintain peace between Russia and Ukraine and within the region with a validity of at least ten years. Some of the issues that should be discussed in these negotiations are the following:

·????????Legitime Russian security concerns;

·????????Ukrainian neutrality. This means that the current and future Ukrainian government should not insist on becoming a NATO member while the agreement is in force or for a maximum of ten years. The Ukrainian government should officially request NATO to freeze the process for the entry of the country into the organization submitted in 2022 until future notice;

·????????To freeze the expansion of NATO toward the Russian borders and define the role to be played by already NATO members with borders with Russia within the military strategy of the organization and the actions to be taken by Russia in order to avoid a possible escalation of tensions and a conflict between the parties involved;

·????????The establishment of a security or demilitarized zone, an agreement on the deployment of a limited number of troops and military equipment in this zone, and the prohibition of the deployment within this zone of strategic and other offensive weapons agreed upon by the parties;

·????????An agreement on any change in the 2014 borders of Ukraine with Russia;

·????????The final status of the Crimea Peninsula, the Donbas, Zaporiyia, and Jerson regions;

·????????The exclusion of all ultranationalists and fascist groups from the Ukrainian government, army, and security forces;

·????????The role of the United Nations, or any other acceptable equivalent international body, in supervising the implementation of the ceasefire arrangement and any other agreements adopted related to the war in Ukraine.

·????????The responsibility of Russia, Ukraine, the US, the EU, and other countries in the reconstruction of the country's civil infrastructure, buildings, industries, hospitals, and schools destroyed by the war;

·????????The elimination of all sanctions adopted against Russia since 2014, particularly those associated with the Crimea Peninsula annexation and the war in Ukraine of February 2022;

·????????Legal issues associated with the Russian and Ukrainian military force's behavior and military operations in the war in Ukraine.

????Summing up can be stated the following: the key issue here is not whether Ukraine will win the war or not, but the price the Ukrainian government is willing to pay to stop the war and to reach a lasting peace with Russia.

????It will be exceedingly difficult for the Ukrainian government to maintain the current war efforts, even with the US, the EU, and NATO assistance, if it lasts a long time, as the Secretary-General of NATO has predicted. The situation will become more complicated if the amount of this assistance begins to be questioned by several governments of the countries now providing this assistance. If the US, leading NATO military forces, is not willing to enter the war in Ukraine directly to confront Russia's military operations, and this scenario is out of all US and NATO plans, then it is almost impossible for the Ukrainian army alone, even with external military and financial assistance now under question, to win this war militarily and recover the territory now under Russian control using their military forces.

????The three alternatives mentioned above are the main options that could be considered to resolve the war in Ukraine. For this reason, the Ukrainian and Russian governments should adopt a flexible position on the main issues to be discussed related to a ceasefire arrangement and during the negotiations of a lasting peace agreement between the Russian and Ukrainian governments to impede another war with unknown consequences for international peace and stability.