Democracies’ Short-Sightedness: Why Are So Many of Ukraine’s Allies Pushing for Peace Talks and Concession?

Security
1 May 2023, 15:18

Ukraine’s Western Allies have provided the goods for Ukraine’s military to keep going and reclaim more of its land. The war however, has dragged on for over 14 months now and without the end in sight just yet.

Calls for ending the war through a compromise or a mere ceasefire (as suggested by Turkey – Ukraine and Russia could simply implement a ceasefire for 3-5 years) have always been done in the name of peace. It is quite evident that neither those who wish to win time for the Russians through a fraudulent agreement, nor people who seem to be genuinely proposing such a scenario in order to establish peace in Ukraine believe that Russia would adhere to any peace agreement in its current form. While Putin’s regime is still active, there is no reason to believe that Ukraine will no longer be under attack. Freezing the war in Ukraine has its obvious benefits for Russia – to rebuild its military and economy and strike again after a few years. If everyone knows this, why are there still prominent officials that are genuinely considering a compromise for a false peace of a few years?

The answer is in the nature of democratic states. Many ruling parties across Western nations are quite sensitive to calls from various parts of their electorate who may be skewing towards anti-establishment and extremist parties, as they feel another ‘proxy war’ is dragging on for too long. The logic is that more weapons equals more bloodshed, therefore if weapons supply is halted to Ukraine, peace will be achieved. As long as an agreement is in place with Russia, people will not be dying and therefore things would be better than they are now. If such a strategy was suddenly adopted by western leaders looking for re-election every four or five years, it would be a domestic victory for them. Surely, this would work as a boost for their campaign, at least as long as the “peace” lasts.

The over-perception of the cost of provisions to Ukraine have all but helped this narrative. Somehow the responsibility of the war has slowly shifted from Russia to Ukraine and its allies. You’d think “Oh but what are they doing to stop the war? Surely the Leopard tanks are not a step towards stopping the war?”. Despite the fact that the majority of the population across the West is in favor of arms supply to Ukraine, the pushing of short-term peace for short-term pleasure has become a drug for some. You know the consequences will far outweigh the high, yet one still pursues such an option for short-term gain and long-term loss.

After all, a democratic leader looking for re-election is usually only able to run for two or three terms. If he was hailed for achieving a peace deal in his 2nd term and was re-elected for it in his 3rd, a new war breaking out in his 3rd term wouldn’t really affect his administration.

In essence, this is where democracies fail when confronting authoritarian, rogue states. Democratic leaders, new that appeasement wouldn’t work in the long-term in 2014, yet they chose a path that eventually backfired. Many if not all of those who are pushing for an unjust peace agreement for Ukraine now, are mainly focused on how to survive their next re-election. If it backfires after their re-election, so be it, at least they made it past the post in time. Besides the obvious fact that any peace agreement with Putin would embolden him to strike again in a few years, many leaders seem to be ignoring the fact that the systematic war crimes and crimes against humanity of the Russian army should not go unanswered. Any regime that proved the capability of carrying out such horrendous crimes has shown that any compromise and agreement with it defeats the entire purpose of any deal.

This is Articte sidebar