09/04/2024

The Peace of the Cemeteries

The Garden of Earthly Delights by El Bosco (16th century) is an enigmatic triptych work, which could be representing a metaphor for the destiny of humanity. The creation shows, in the first panel, a fantastical world of lust, pleasures, and ephemeral happiness, in the second, a frenzy where madness erupts, and, finally, in the third panel, Hell.

Eric Hobsbawm in "The Age of Extremes" also referred to a triptych which, from his perspective, represented that short 20th century he conceived and which involved the Age of Catastrophes 1914-1945; the Golden Age 1945-47-1973; and the age of Crisis and Decomposition 1973/89-1991.

Pepe Paradiso pointed to Hobsbawm's nomenclature combined with the long-term historical structures of F. Braudel. In his contemplation of temporalities and chronological horizons, he conceived a 21st century that contains numerous unresolved issues lingering from the previous century and as such, extend into what we chronologically consider the 21st century.

The German sociologist Wolfgang Streeck portrays our time through another triptych: Stagnation, inflation, and debt are the riders of the apocalypse that run through his analyses of the fate of capitalism and capitalist society.

Today, interstate armed conflicts are once again at the center of the international stage; the hell in the work of El Bosco, the extent of the crisis and decomposition in the work of Hobsbawm, the unresolved issues that the 20th century carries in the work of Paradiso, and the results of a recklessness proposed by profit-driven ambition, in that of Streeck. The increase in these conflicts reverses the declining trend that had been prevailing over a long historical cycle. The war between Russia and Ukraine involves each component of these triptychs, where the possibility of a devastating escalation (the hell) and an unprecedented crisis becomes a reality.

In March 2022, almost two months after what Russia then called a "Special Military Operation" in Ukraine (now considered war), a possibility of peace was presented. It was the result of Turkey's mediation, through their Minister of Foreign Affairs who maintained an open dialogue with his Russian counterpart, while at the same time being a member of NATO (Turkey has Nato’s second most important army), and close to Zelensky, presented the possibility of a ceasefire for negotiations. Vladimir Putin demanded respect for the Minsk Agreements concluded in 2014 and 2015 (a demilitarized Ukraine, ending the war in the Donbass region), security conditions that included the impossibility of Ukraine's entry into NATO and therefore, demanded Ukraine's neutrality, recognition of the annexation of Crimea to Russia, recognition of the separatist republics of Donetsk and Luhansk as independent states, as well as a respect for identity and religion. The ban on the Russian language by the Maidan government, the demands of the dioceses of Belarus, Moscow, and Ukraine to be considered part of the same Russian people had to be taken into account, as well as invoked by the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, Kirill I, (which today is part of an underlying conflict projected in the war, revealing the possibility of a schism in a church that has more than 100 million followers). Zelensky has demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory and an end to the war. The stability in the Black Sea, the continuity of commercial relations, energy, Turkey's geopolitical location, and the possibility of generating assets in its foreign policy, opened this opportunity to carry out an agreement based on 15 points.

It was not only then-Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson but also Joe Biden who quickly sunk this opportunity. Global competition prevailed once again.

In July 2022, the escalation of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine thwarted the possibility of exporting cereals, oilseeds, and fertilizers from the Black Sea to the rest of the world. The sordidness of war was felt quickly. For the second time, the President of Turkey managed to intervene so that both Ukrainian and Russian shipments could supply the countries of a continent where hunger can translate into the outbreak of armed conflicts, malnutrition, and death. On that occasion, the Secretary-General of the African Union warned of the flood that could generate a food crisis that added to the increase in food prices, and food shortages in the poorest countries on the continent.

The Black Sea Initiative was signed by Ukraine and Russia in Istanbul as a result of the intervention of President Tayyip Erdogan and the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres. Ships carrying tons of cereals would be monitored by a Joint Coordination Center composed of all parties that guaranteed safe transit from the Black Sea to the Turkish straits.

Facilitation, diplomatic efforts and international mediation provide different commitments for the parties. However, in critical situations, they are conceived as attempts by third parties that the parties involved trust. The idea of ​​well-being for humanity, collective effort, and diplomatic predisposition to alleviate the negative effects associated with war dispensed with this possibility. Almost a year after the Black Sea Initiative, supported by the winds of war, a series of mutual accusations between the contenders led to its suspension.

First, Second, or third panel of the triptych?

The year 2024 drags on the results of a conflict that does not pave the way for peace. NATO has new allies (Sweden and Finland), a portrait of the incomprehensible acceptance by Europe of the destruction of the results of the Helsinki Security Conference (1975), a secure, peaceful, and inclusive Europe facing global geopolitical competition replaced by an aggressive system where today the majority loses with regards to security, stability, and cooperation. Through hesitations and then outbursts, Europe has become subjected to the decisions of others. More than two years of war in Ukraine where Russian military victory seems to be a given, where populations in Europe resist the proposals of their governments to continue with the war, where dissensions arise among European governments where some (silently) refuse to continue investing in aid to Ukraine -due to the increase in defense spending, inflation, and energy shortages- and due to the worrying rise of far-right anti-system parties that relentlessly feed on popular discontent, while other rulers, as a desperate strategy, insist on continuing to fuel a war that translates into hundreds of thousands of deaths and great destruction. In a framework of an electoral campaign in the leading NATO power that has contributed 60% of the organization's total budget (and that presents demands towards partners who perceive uncertainty about a possible change of course) and from which the legislative blockade originates about whether to continue providing money and weapons for Ukraine. Faced with the lack of ammunition to face a shoot off that has dragged on too long exposing a strategy that has failed and that has become a war of attrition In an atmosphere where the ambition of private companies, contractors, and the excessively infamous and lucrative industries of production, commerce, and trafficking compete to continue providing armaments, while Ukraine lowers the age for recruiting young people to go to war. In a terrain where the President of the United States publicly labels Vladimir Putin as a "crazy son of a...," "bandit," "butcher," is it possible to negotiate peace?

There are two theoretically defined situations that open the door to a negotiation process in critical circumstances: "the stalemate," implying a situation of mutually harmful or mutually painful deadlock, and "the precipice," implying the perception of an imminent catastrophe. In both cases, a unilateral exit by either party becomes highly costly and likely irrational.

Triptych once again; is it possible to return to the idea of well-being for humanity, collective effort, and diplomatic predisposition? Who can be the third party for peace?

Verónica Pérez Taffi President of AERIA (Argentine Association of Studies in International Relations). PhD candidate in International Relations at USAL. Professor at USAL, UNTREF, UNDAV, and UP.