Miklos K. Radvanyi, vice president of the Frontiers of Freedom Institute provided an analysis for Gulyáságyú Média. / Radványi Miklós, az egyesült államokbeli republikánus think-tank, a Frontiers of Freedom Institute alelnöke angol nyelvű elemzése a Gulyáságyú Média számára.
Nyitóképünkön: Orbán Viktor miniszterelnök a magyar Országgyűlés plenáris ülésén ül. Forrás: MTI/Miniszterelnöki Kommunikációs Főosztály/Kaiser Ákos.
Támogatóink hozzájárulása nélkül ez a cikkünk sem készülhetett volna el. Ne csak olvassa, támogassa is lapunkat: kattintson ide.
Best and worst of times
In his historical novel „A Tale Of Two Cities”, Charles Dickens’ opening sentence became a world famous verdict on the seemingly imperishable situation of the 19th century Europe immiserating under the ambiguous repercussions of the 1789 French Revolution: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.”
Presently, leading politicians of all ideological persuasions and ethnicities are looking for someone to blame for all the existing as well as self-generated crises that are endangering their democratic or tyrannical leaderships. However, campaigning successfully on possibly solvable or mostly utopian promises is one thing; actually delivering real solutions is another.
What has begun as an achievable promise of ending Putin’s ideologically bigoted war against the sovereign state of Ukraine in 2014, has evolved into a strategically inconsistent and tactically amorphous effort by the United States of America and its allies in NATO and the European Union to quickly end the destructive irrationality of the Kremlin’s desire to reestablish the status quo ante of the pre-1990s.
Clearly, the Russo-Ukrainian War cannot be ended by violently oscillating in a grossly inconsistent manner between illogical pusillanimity and excessive intimidation of either of the two parties. Consequently, as long as haphazard individual political actions by mostly incompetent bureaucrats will continue, the attainability of true peace will remain patently absurd.
Not a theatrical performance
Amid the illegal upsetting of the balance of power on the European continent, the diplomatic noise has only grown more and more irrational. Insignificant political personalities, such as Viktor Orban, Robert Fico, Kim Jong Un, and innumerable others have used the promise of peace to call for “just get the deal done.” Yet peace is not a theatrical performance and cannot be achieved through increasing the chaos or cynically promoting the justifiable desire of the people for a quick solution. Unprincipled compromises are not alternatives because they will only plant the seeds of the next war.
In reality, what is needed are principles that are not obstacles to peace but are the foundations of it. These principles that cannot be compromised in any Russia-Ukraine Peace are: the principle of sovereignty that cannot be traded away; the principle that borders cannot be redrawn by force; the principle that genuine peace cannot be built on the silencing of the victim; the principle that war crimes and atrocities cannot be ignored for convenience; the principle that security guarantees must be credible and not symbolic; the principle that peace must reinforce international norms cum values and not undermine them; the principle that diplomacy must serve peace and not personal prestige; and, finally, the principle that honest diplomacy is not a cat-and-mouse game, which rewards those who use terroristic deceptions to violate peace.
Capitulation dressed up in diplomatic language
In light of these fundamental principles, no future peace agreement is legitimate that would force Ukraine to surrender its internationally recognized sovereignty. In this respect, sovereignty includes territorial integrity, the right to self-defense, and the freedom to pursue political, economic, and security partnerships of its choosing. A peace forced through coercion or under the threat of ongoing violence is not peace; it is capitulation dressed up in diplomatic language. Moreover, one of the foundational norms of the post-World War II international order is that borders cannot be changed by invasion. Allowing territorial conquest to stand – whether justified as “temporary,” “pragmatic,” or “the only realistic option,” would only reward aggression and legitimize it for future conflicts.
Also, Ukraine must be a full, equal, and unpressured participant in any negotiations. A deal crafted without Ukraine’s unencumbered consent or under the ridiculous pretense that “poor Kyiv would eventually accept what we decide over its head” is morally bankrupt and strategically self-defeating. In addition, a flimsy paper guarantee that unravels at the first sign of pressure is worse than no guarantee at all.
Any peace agreement must establish enforceable, permanent mechanisms that absolutely protect Ukraine from renewed Russian aggression – be it military, economic, or political. Such an agreement must also be binding, transparent, and enforceable.
Finally, any future peace agreement must strengthen the international legal order and not undermine it, according to the monstrously barbaric Russian tyranny that has hovered, from its inception, between the omnipotent autocracy of the East and the military intimidation of the West.
Russia cannot be rewarded for its illegal aggression
In conclusion, Ukraine cannot be played by anybody and shortchanged in the process by others of pursuing peace self-servingly and without informed intelligence.
For years, the United States and its allies have insisted that any peace agreement must be built on one essential, non-negotiable principle: Russia cannot be rewarded for its illegal aggression. This principle must not be discarded and because of it Ukraine must not be abandoned.
For Ukraine, paying the immediate as well as the long-term price by itself, is unacceptable. All of this becomes even more troubling when the timing of the miserable original “28 Points” is put under the microscope. Zelensky’s corruption crisis and the domestic turmoil in the United States, in Europe, in Asia, throughout Africa, and in Central and South America, threaten to reshape the world into an even more chaotic powder keg. Under such perilous circumstances, Ukraine cannot allow any other state or states to determine its future. President Zelensky and the Ukrainian people have no other choice but to persevere and fight for their dignified survival.
The alternative is hopelessness in a future that is not theirs.
The articles appearing in our opinion section do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff of Gulyáságyú Media.
Would you like to debate the above article? Or perhaps it has inspired you? We look forward to receiving your opinion piece, supported by arguments, at our contact details.