Professor Petro explores the very important question of how Ukraine might eventually achieve a long-term peace.
2 thoughts on “Nicolai Petro: Prospects for Peace in Ukraine: The Non-Military Aspect”
Comments are closed.
Professor Petro explores the very important question of how Ukraine might eventually achieve a long-term peace.
Comments are closed.
Another excellent presentation, thanks again.
As the speaker regretfully notes in concluding his presentation, circumstances have defeated supporters of the pluralistic national construct, or ‘civic patriotism’ as the speaker describes. Zelensky was supposed to represent these things, but he was quickly co-opted by nationalists and external sponsors.
The ‘Malorossian’ portion of the country has been convinced by events that their immediate safety is most likely found in being a breakaway Russian protectorate at a minimum, and their prosperity (relative to Ukraine at least) and longer term security would require annexation into Russia. They have no illusions what it means to be a proxy battleground.
The ‘Galician’ portion of the country too has no illusions about this, I think, only the most politically active among them see it to their advantage to be a proxy battleground. With US sponsorship, and with the removal Crimea, and post-2015 breakaway Donetsk and Lugansk from the demographics, political control was easy. Had they simply left alone the frozen lines per Minsk II, they would have readily accomplished most of their objectives, and given another 10 years, would have likely been able to indoctrinate even the pro-neutrality demographic, whom they anyway could coopt / suppress / silence / expel in the interim.
When the dust settles from the acute conflict, even if the lines return to 2015 (unlikely), demographics will almost certainly be altered by refugee flows. This means further to self-segregation, more unbalanced political divide, thus less able to support a political equilibrium which would be the mechanism to realize the pluralistic / civic patriotism described by the speaker.
A Truth and Reconciliation Commission would be a fine idea, however, for the current generation of imperialist powers — to sit down at a table with all the people of the many proxy battlegrounds they have poisoned to uphold this or that hegemonic position. One day in the distant future, when the next hegemon will be doing the same, it would at least leave a hopeful example to follow.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment.