With Russia’s indiscriminate murder of Ukraine’s civilians continuing unabated – and the refugee exodus from Ukraine reaching epic proportions (aside from those fleeing the country, there are already reports of between 8 million and 12 million of internally displaced), the pressure is mounting on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to seek a negotiated settlement with Russia.
Several teams are working around the clock across both official and unofficial channels to explore how such solution might look like. Their efforts give rise to a number of questions. Can peace with a brutal dictator next door be achieved? Can such peace be secure? What would be the consequences of such peace? To answer, several axioms need to be established.
The first one is that as a result of the Feb. 24 invasion, Russia ceased to function as a member of the international community. It is now an increasingly isolated pariah state with an increasingly repressive domestic regime. Rather than becoming the Third Temple (also known as the Third Jerusalem, a stated aspiration of Russia’s spiritual leaders), it has become the Third Reich.
The second one is that Ukraine demonstrated its absolute will to fight and will not yield to Russia’s aggression. There is no military outcome involving Ukraine’s surrender.
Finally, it has become abundantly clear that Ukraine does not stand alone and, rather than the war between Russia and Ukraine, we are now witnessing the war between Russia and the global coalition. Let’s start using the term the War in Ukraine to characterise this conflict – and remember that it dates back to 2014 and Russia’s annexation of Crimea.
Which brings about an interesting observation.
Contrary to what some might believe – and are clearly scared of – this war does not resemble the World Wars I and II, even though it is playing out in the heart of Europe, where the two previous world wars have started. There is no grand coalition on Russia’s side. Russia’s only semi-formal ally, Belarus, is on the verge of internal implosion, with ordinary Belarusians engaged in active sabotage against Russian troops and in cyber-warfare against both Russia and their own government. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko initially toyed with the idea of sending the country’s troops across Ukraine’s border to assist Kremlin, but swiftly backtracked for the fear that the troops might do a 180 degree turn and join Ukraine’s side instead.
This means that the war in Ukraine appears to follow the blueprint not of a world war but of a horrifying, bloody but still a regional conflict. The parallel that comes to mind is that with the Korean War of 1950-1953. No two conflicts are the same, but lessons from the Korean War can help create a framework for evaluating the War in Ukraine – and the prospects for peace between Ukraine and Russia.
The first lesson one is that peace – or, rather, armistice – with a brutal dictator next door is possible, however unpalatable it might be. Just as South Korea and North Korea negotiated armistice after the three years of fighting, Ukraine and Russia can negotiate one as well without the demand of a regime change in Kremlin. The Hague trial for war crimes committed by Russia in Ukraine will still need to take place, but the perpetrators may have to be tried in abstentia and the implementation of the Court’s ruling will need to wait.
The difference between peace and armistice is distinct. While major hostilities between North and South Koreas ended de facto on July 27, 1953, de jure the two countries are still at war. The armistice option is the one Ukraine might want to explore while negotiating with Russia.
The second lesson is that such armistice can also be secure – up to a point. North Korea (DPRK) and South Korea maintained their armistice for almost 70 years now and there are no indications that either country is ready to fully breach it yet. The armistice has become conditional on heavy militarisation of South Korea and on the global sanctions against the DPRK. It is worth noting, however, that North Korea is continuously testing South Korea’s defences, including missile provocations, incursions into South Korean territorial waters, espionage activities, etc.
The third lesson is related to the second one. Any armistice between Ukraine and Russia without the regime change in Kremlin will have to be backed up by continuation of the sanctions. To ensure that Russia does not attack Ukraine following the armistice, not only will current sanctions need to remain in place, but new, more severe sanctions will have to be added on. All trade relations between Russia and the members of the global coalition will need to be severed, all direct and portfolio investment into Russia by the members of the global coalition will need to stop (and existing investments divested), most of technology, science and cultural cooperation will need to cease, etc. In other words, the global coalition must apply to Russia the same sanctions it is currently applying to North Korea – and some. Russia will need to be cut off from the world.
Finally – and sadly – the Korean War lessons teach us that unless there is a regime change in Kremlin, Russia will not cease its military activities until President Vladimir Putin believes that the conflict has reached a stalemate. For as long as Putin thinks there is hope to win, Russia will continue to push for the land grab on Ukraine’s south to create continental access to Crimea, will continue to bomb Ukraine’s infrastructure, strike at Ukraine’s cities, etc. This will create an enormous human toll. To put things into perspective, 990,968 South Korean civilians and 137,899 military personnel perished during the three years of the Korean War.
Countries always pay in blood for their freedom.
Dr. Marianna Kozintseva is a global macro strategist and a fintech entrepreneur. She worked at Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan, Bear Stearns, World Bank and RAND Corporation. Currently, she is a visiting faculty at the SKB Institute for Financial Economics, Singapore Management University.
