Christmas across the European continent was more
subdued this year than usual, thanks to the war in Ukraine. Country after
country sought to reduce their electricity consumption amid a cut in Russian
gas supplies.
اضافة اعلان
Iconic stores on Paris’ Champs Elysees and the famous Christmas lights
of London’s Oxford Street went dark every evening. In
Germany, a government campaign sought to reduce energy consumption. The war in
the far east of Europe is hitting households in the West.
Weaponizing energy is all part of Russia’s winter
war, hoping the cold months will sap Western morale and split European ranks.
For months, the war has taken a terrifying toll on Arab and African countries,
as the conflict disrupted global food supplies and rocketed
the price of staple products. But Moscow hopes the winter war will be its
secret weapon, freezing Europeans into opposing the sanctions levied by their
governments, and, by seeking to destroy energy infrastructure across the
country, freezing Ukrainians into submission.
Deadlocked
Will it work? No. But not because European resolve
is so strong, but because there is currently nothing for Westerners to agitate
for or against. There is no credible peace plan on the table, no road map for
how negotiations could begin. Europe’s politics is frozen. For Russia’s winter
war to work, there needs to be, first, a way for Moscow to end that war.
There is no credible peace plan on the table, no road map for how negotiations could begin. Europe’s politics is frozen.
That the war is militarily deadlocked is well
known. The head of Ukraine’s military intelligence admitted as much last week. Front lines have
barely moved for weeks, a situation that suits Moscow. A lack of momentum
allows Russia to focus on destroying energy infrastructure, and saps Ukrainian
morale.
But the war is politically deadlocked as well.
On the Ukrainian side, there is a peace plan, which Ukraine’s president Volodymyr
Zelensky took to Washington, although the US president was
careful not to endorse it directly.
Part of the reason for that is the central clause
of the plan, which calls for the restoration of Ukraine’s territorial
sovereignty — a clause which logically means the restoration of not merely the
four regions in the east and south that Russia has occupied, but even the
Crimean territories seized in 2014. It is difficult to imagine Russia accepting
such a clause and indeed Russia’s Sergei Lavrov dismissed it out of hand.
Equally, however, the maximalist demand laid down
by the Kremlin, that Ukraine recognize those four Ukrainian regions as Russian,
is impossible to imagine. It seems, at a minimum, that Ukraine’s leaders would
require some push from the outside world to be able to accept anything like
that.
Too far gone?
This, then, is the heart of the deadlock. Both
sides believe, if not that they are winning, then that they have the potential
to win. For Ukraine, Zelensky’s first trip abroad since the invasion to
Washington solidified a feeling that the superpower is with Ukraine and will
ensure a battlefield victory.
With no negotiations and no potential parameters, there are no political options to debate. There is only one side: anti-war. Everything else is frozen.
For Russia, despite significant losses of troops
and territorial losses, the country has vast military potential and can sustain
a far longer, more brutal conflict. Even the extensive Western sanctions have
been shrugged off — the country’s economy appears to have shrunk by less than 3 percent since February, a much smaller
amount than the 10-15 percent contraction predicted at the start of the
invasion.
Indeed, the longer the war goes on, the harder any
political agreement will be to negotiate. Kyiv clearly feels too much blood has
been spilled for it to simply hand over annexed territories in return for
peace. For Moscow, a “military operation” that has claimed a minimum of tens of
thousands of soldiers would be difficult to justify without swallowing
substantial territory.
Even among European leaders there is an understanding
that a way out is getting harder to find. Partly that is a reflection of a
specific decision in Washington to cede control of the timing and scope of
negotiations to Kyiv, a decision that has made maximalist demands easier.
As war-wrought changes solidify
But it is also because, with no real political
options on the table, there is nothing for Europe to be divided about. With no
negotiations and no potential parameters, there are no political options to
debate. There is only one side: anti-war. Everything else is frozen. Little
wonder that Europe’s leaders are keeping their heads down: focusing, like Rishi
Sunak in the UK or Olaf Scholz in Germany, on the economy, waiting for
Washington to offer solutions.
Indeed, the rare times a political option comes up
— such as when Emmanuel Macron last month suggested Russia could be offered “security guarantees” to end the war — it is almost
immediately shot down by Ukrainians or Europeans.
If a frozen war benefits Moscow, a frozen politics
benefits no one. The vast changes wrought by the war to global trade and
politics are solidifying. New alliances are being formed. Companies and states
from Europe to the Gulf are deciding where to allocate billions of dollars in
investments. The war has warped global markets and politics and that warping
could easily become permanent.
A solution to Russia’s war in Ukraine does not need to come from Russia or Ukraine. But it needs to come from somewhere.
A solution to Russia’s war in Ukraine does not need
to come from Russia or Ukraine. But it needs to come from somewhere. A frozen
war is really a war without end, and there is no guarantee what shape the world
will be in once it thaws.
Faisal Al Yafai is currently writing a
book on the Middle East and is a frequent commentator on
international TV news networks. He has worked for news outlets such as The
Guardian and the BBC, and reported on the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa. Twitter: @FaisalAlYafai. Copyright: Syndication
Bureau.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
