America and NATO need to understand this possible scenario
Achieving peace in Ukraine needs an emerging power of mediation
A Ukrainian soldier fires shells at the Russian positions at the points of contact, in an atmosphere that does not promise a solution soon.
Reuters
If the war continues, Putin's allies will disperse around him.
dad
picture
While the Russian-Ukrainian war continues unabated and without a clear goal in the end, in exchange for continuous losses of lives and property, the question remains: How long can this war continue?
Dr. Edward Salo, an associate professor of history and co-director of the Ph.D. Program in Heritage Studies at Arkansas State University, said in a report published by the American National Interest magazine that over the past few days there have been hints from both sides in the Russian-Ukrainian war that There may be reasons for a diplomatic solution.
He explained that this path to peace is promising, due to the massive military losses incurred by Russia, which seriously weakened the state, and would require years, if not decades, to compensate.
Both sides also know that the coming winter months will make military operations more difficult and lead to more deaths on and off the battlefield.
Bad ambiance
Salo says that while the current atmosphere for a diplomatic solution looks bad, I would argue that this is an opportunity for an emerging power to step up on the international stage, brokering peace between Russia and Ukraine, to cement its position as a leading power, just as the United States did during the Russo-Japanese War (1904). -1905).
Salo believes that many of the topics related to the Russian war in Ukraine are reminiscent of the situation during the Russo-Japanese War, and the war resulted from the competitive colonial expansion of Russia and Japan, both of which wanted control of the Far East.
Moreover, the Czar of Russia saw the war as a way to boost the popularity of his regime in a period of national decline, and to strengthen Russia's place among the great empires of Europe.
Japan saw the war as an opportunity to become the superpower in Asia.
After a series of failed diplomatic missions to avert war, the Japanese navy launched a surprise attack on the Russian navy at Port Arthur. After this crushing attack, the Russians continued to suffer further defeats, before finally agreeing to a negotiated peace in 1905, and the Japanese army was closer to The collapse than it seemed, although it was not visible to the Japanese.
Salo argues that while the actual situation of what happened in 1904-1905 is not the context of the current Russo-Ukrainian war (in 1904 Japan attacked Russia, in 2022 Russia attacked Ukraine), he offers several parallels that make the war Japanese Russian is a useful example.
Russian forces in Ukraine, as in 1905, suffered heavy losses to what was initially seen as an inferior enemy.
early conflicts
The Russo-Japanese War was also one of the first conflicts to demonstrate the power of the Industrial Revolution in the mass production of weapons and equipment, just as the Russo-Ukrainian War demonstrated the effectiveness of drones and other technologies on the battlefield.
In 1904-1905, the Russian Navy lost much of its fleet, which was the focus of the show of force at the time.
In Ukraine, Russia lost many naval ships, and more than 1,400 tanks and armored vehicles, which are the hallmarks of modern land warfare.
In the period 1904-1905 and today, losses and defeats on the battlefield have been painful for Russia both domestically and internationally.
With such catastrophic events happening in Russia and Ukraine, the question arises of how to end the war and negotiate peace.
Once again, a look back in history offers one possible scenario.
In the case of the Russo-Japanese War, it was the United States that emerged as the peace broker.
The United States was an emerging world power, after Spain's defeat in the Spanish-American War.
Some say the victory marked the beginning of her empire and a period of explosive economic growth.
However, the United States was not a traditional world power like Great Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Russia, because it was not involved in the treaties and diplomatic agreements that those countries had, including the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902. Because of this network of Alliances Most European powers cannot be seen as neutral enough to facilitate a treaty that will not be one-sided.
Today, the United States and Western European countries are so involved in supporting Ukraine that it cannot be considered a neutral arbiter of peace.
Any negotiation by Russia would only be seen by hard-liners in Moscow as weakening their state (which the war is already doing).
Chance
However, this is an opportunity for another emerging power to establish itself on the international stage by acting as a mediator in a peace conference. This country needs to possess the diplomatic and military might, as the United States had in 1905, to be seen as a close counterpart to Russia, but it is not threat to the existence of Russia.
Moreover, that country should not have a direct interest in the region (say Turkey), but have some economic interests at stake (such as Ukrainian food production).
Finally, the country should have few formal ties with allies Russia or Ukraine.
As the war progressed, the number of countries that met these criteria decreased. Iran, which had attempted to become a regional power, removed itself as a potential peace broker by selling arms to Russia.
China, which many countries look to as another leading player, has been very supportive of Russia.
Of course, even if an emerging power like Brazil, Saudi Arabia, or India tries to broker a peace agreement, this does not guarantee that it will be accepted or that Russia will abide by the terms in the long term.
However, as more Russian forces are lost on the battlefield, Russian President Vladimir Putin's allies begin to suspect him, Ukrainians suffer a harsh winter, and more international pressure will be put on Kyiv and Moscow to begin peace talks, and this presents an opportunity for another country to take its place on the stage. global as a neutral arbiter.
The United States and NATO need to understand this likely scenario and determine the best course of action to help broker peace, as well as the lasting consequences.
The United States and Western European countries are so involved in supporting Ukraine that it cannot be considered a neutral arbiter of peace. Any negotiation by Russia would only be seen by hardliners in Moscow as weakening their state.
After losing more Russian troops on the battlefield, allies of Russian President Vladimir Putin begin to suspect him. The Ukrainians are going through a harsh winter, and more international pressure will be put on Kyiv and Moscow to start peace talks.
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news