After more than a thousand days of internationally condemned Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine and more than a million casualties, the senseless war in Ukraine must end.
By Yurii Sheliazhenko
Ukrainian Quakers proposed that a Christmas truce could be introduced to start peace talks the sooner the better, hopefully between 25 December and 7 January, the days when Christmas is celebrated in Ukraine and Russia. “We pray for peace and justice” – was said in the ministry.
Such peace talks could include introduction of ceasefire, NATO membership as a security guarantee for Ukraine, nuclear neutrality (accession to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons) of Ukraine and commitment of NATO to allow nuclear neutrality for members of the alliance as security guarantees to Russia, and readiness on both sides to resolve their territorial dispute by peaceful means.
Public opinion polls both in Russia and Ukraine show support for peace talks, but also strong popular support of incompatible positions held by both governments. However, many people are unwilling to fight war for the radical demands of their governments. Millions fled Russia and Ukraine in order not to be forcibly mobilized into a meat grinder. The Russian government declared people to be “foreign agents” and relentlessly repressed conscientious objectors to military service and antiwar activists. Ukraine imprisons objectors, abducts men of age 18-60 on streets and forcibly transports them to recruitment centers, where those who refuse to fight war are treated inhumanely with several reported cases of death in custody. Desertion is pandemic in the Russian and Ukrainian armies.
Russia insists that Ukraine must give up occupied territories and aspirations of NATO membership. There are controversial claims that Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine were historically populated by Russians, and counter-claims that Russian colonial politics and denial of the existence of Ukraine as an independent nation have no legitimate grounds in international law.
Ukraine refuses to cede officially any territories and sees NATO membership as the only viable security guarantee that could prevent further Russian attacks, though Ukraine (according to President Zelenskyy’s interview to Sky News) is ready not to pursue regaining Russia-occupied territories by force, self-restraining to diplomatic efforts, in exchange for an invitation to NATO with no Article 5 guarantees related to Russia-occupied territories.
While these positions are fixed as non-negotiable, the Russian offensive gradually expands its occupied territories of Ukraine, and the Ukrainian counter-offensive has captured a small part of the Russian mainland, which some propagandists in Ukraine call historical Ukrainian lands.
The war escalated with a Russian hypersonic intermediate-range ballistic missile being fired at the Ukrainian city of Dnipro in a clear nuclear threat, when the government of Ukraine obtained from the United States and other Western governments permission to use their weapons supplies for long-range strikes into Russia after alleged military involvement of North Korea on the Russian side.
Asserting Ukrainian NATO membership ambitions as non-negotiable while President-elect Trump signaled willingness to prevent that from happening as a bargaining chip for President Putin, President Zelensky signaled that denial of what he says is the only real strategic security guarantee that the West might offer could make Ukraine reconsider a decision to give up nuclear weapons made in the 1990s.
The dangerous informal signals that Ukraine could realistically regain nuclear weapons if not allowed to join NATO are already used by the Kremlin to justify escalation of its nuclear blackmail, though these signals are officially dismissed by statements that Ukraine complies with its non-proliferation obligations. However, being one of the countries with the lowest fear of nuclear war in the world, as polls reveal, Ukraine seemingly has some radicals among its ruling elite who tend to be reckless in asserting that “we will have NATO nuclear umbrella or home-made nukes”.
After Trump’s hawkish foreign policy nomination proposals, including a UN ambassador nominee who supported NATO membership of Ukraine in 2022, with public exchanges in the media between Trump’s and Putin’s men that suggest a “peace trough strength” approach and a lack of willingness to make tradeoffs on both sides, it is possible that the “24-hour peace” plan of President-elect Trump will lead to quick rejection of his offer by the Kremlin and a subsequent increase of military support to Ukraine, not ruling out even nuclear saber-rattling.
Prevention of nuclear war between NATO and Russia, and survival of humankind requires that an end to the Russian war of aggression be made in a peaceful and fair way, not “freezing” the war but starting a genuine reconciliation process. Toward that end, transformations in the world security architecture are needed, and a spirit of change is already moving in the air with discussions of necessary reforms of NATO and the UN.
The most important change needed is to make NATO less threatening to Russia, where it is currently perceived as a hostile nuclear alliance. The experience of war in Ukraine shows that NATO could help Ukraine in a defensive war by conventional means, without nuclear deterrence. This careful reduction of the nuclear threat could be a basis for a long-term settlement with Russia, even if NATO will not abandon its so-called “open-door policy” that annoys the Kremlin.
Of course, it would be ideal to disband NATO along with all military alliances and armies in the world, scrap all nukes and conventional weapons, and give the UN more powers and resources to strengthen nonviolent global governance and peaceful conflict resolution. However, in absence of proper peace education, the majority of people almost everywhere still put their trust into armies and military alliances instead of peacebuilding dialogue and diplomacy. Since the enthusiasts in peace movements have not changed this situation yet, we need to think about gradual transition to universal peace, step-by-step.
After the first step, the ceasefire, commitment to nuclear neutrality could be a value-based solution to end the war in Ukraine with universal appeal.
It was suggested in a Quaker ministry: “At the summit in Rio de Janeiro, leaders of 20 biggest world economies in their declaration committed to a world free of nuclear weapons. Indeed, nuclear war should not happen, it would mean cities turned into radioactive graveyards and millions of killed. I imagine how Ukraine could also commit to a world free of nuclear weapons by joining the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, so that even if Ukraine were to join NATO, there would be no nuclear weapons and no nuclear drills in Ukrainian territory”.
Current State parties to the TPNW and peace movements could propose nuclear neutrality for Ukraine and tolerance of nuclear neutrality in NATO as a way to reconcile with Russia. They could remind NATO allies and rivals about their obligations to make good-faith efforts for complete nuclear disarmament according to Article VI of Non-Proliferation Treaty, and insist that the Nuclear Club must stop threatening the world with nuclear apocalypse, ironically for the sake of so-called security.
If NATO will allow members to be parties to TPNW, not only Ukraine but also traditionally peaceful countries like Sweden, Norway, and Finland might consider nuclear neutrality within NATO, decreasing risks of nuclear war, or any war, in Europe.Russia already tolerates nuclear neutrality of allies and partners like Kazakhstan (a member of Russia-led Collective Security Treaty Organization) and Mongolia, so, it would be proportional for NATO countries to adopt the same policy.
Apart from direct damage from Russian aggression against Ukraine, there are also anti-democratic tendencies and exaggerated mutual allegations in sowing ethnic hatred to the enemy through the official propaganda both in Russia and Ukraine. Though this similarity between the aggressor and the victim is no excuse for Russian aggression, it seems that some sort of peaceful transformations in both societies is needed for genuine reconciliation in the future. Both knowledge and faith could be helpful on that way of transformations.
Ukrainian Quakers (the Meeting of Friends of Ukraine) and other pacifists hope that mainstream churches shamelessly blessing war and militarism could be turned to light with a time by spreading peaceful religious worldviews and secular humanist pacifism.
We launched in Ukraine the School of Pacifism Free Civilians educating people about nature and practices of genuine peace, and when this project will be developed enough, we have plans to assist Russian friends in the creation of a similar school.
The Ukrainian Pacifist Movement, as an affiliate of World BEYOND War, will continue to contribute to peace education efforts of our worldwide network aimed at abolition of all wars.
