Doubts over the durability of peace in Ukraine despite the ceasefire that formally came into effect on Sunday, represent a dangerous augury in the months-long, bloody and bitter conflict between government and separatist rebel forces. Prospects of any swift cessation of hostilities were thrown into jeopardy after differences surfaced even as the deal was being drawn up, with some players advocating an immediate suspension of violence and others insisting upon some preparatory delay. During the run-up to Sunday, the objective of the opposing forces seems to have been to consolidate their respective positions. The sea coast near Mariupol and the city of Debaltseve, which are in Ukrainian control, are said to be critical for the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. Thus, uncertainty seems to have been written into the accord brokered last week by the leaders of France and Germany with their Russian and Ukrainian counterparts. The current developments remind you of how the September 2014 ceasefire fell apart almost as soon as it was agreed upon, leading to a further escalation in the crisis that has now claimed more than 5,000 lives and led to the displacement of a million people.
The fluid situation on the ground is bound to strengthen the Congressional hawks, who have been urging Washington to rethink the current provision of non-lethal aid in favour of backing Kiev with arms. Conversely, the conservative and social democratic partners in Germany’s ruling grand coalition, with French President Francois Hollande, have been almost categorical in their opposition to any military solution to the crisis in Europe’s eastern flanks. The German Chancellor, in fact, made an analogous reference to the erection of the Berlin Wall as she elaborated on Europe’s position on Ukraine at the annual Munich security conference the previous weekend. Angela Merkel pointed out that the western powers did not resort to force to counter the action. Republican Senator John McCain’s allusion, in his speech at the same conference, to the response of the western powers to the Berlin blockade provided shades of the American stance. An unequivocal commitment to finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict is imperative, given the interdependence between Europe and Russia in the areas of economic and energy cooperation. The conflagration in Ukraine also demonstrates that the prospects for peace over the long term depend in no small measure on containing nationalist tendencies in the states of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). In this context, the continued expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) into Russia’s neighbourhood about 25 years after the end of the Cold War, could prove counterproductive.
Corrections and Clarifications:
A clarification: The Editorial refers to the leaders of Russia and Ukraine as counterparts of the French and the German leaders in the sense that all the four personalities in question are heads of their respective governments. As Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, Angela Merkel is head of the government in the same way that President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation, President Francois Hollande of the Republic of France and President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine are all heads of government of their respective countries.
