Russia-Ukraine war: Ordinary citizens want peace. Their leaders should listen
Believe it or not, the war in Ukraine has produced some good news.
An opinion poll just published by Gallup shows that a majority of Ukrainians want peace talks to start as soon as possible.
To give the exact figure, some 52 percent of the people who were questioned rejected the insistence on fighting until military victory over Russia, which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and western governments have made the cornerstone of their policy.
This marks a remarkable shift from two years ago, when only 27 percent supported the idea of peace talks.
The last two weeks have seen a dangerous military escalation on the Russian as well as Ukrainian sides. The Biden administration gave permission for Ukraine’s forces to fire US medium-range missiles on targets in Russia. Britain did likewise for its Storm Shadow missiles, which had initially been given to Ukraine with restrictions.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
Zelensky promptly ordered his forces to launch the missiles. Russia's President Vladimir Putin has been escalating all along, too. He announced last week that Russia reserved the right to attack targets in states which supplied weapons to Ukraine, and he threatened directly that Russia could resort to nuclear weapons.
To register intent, he fired an intercontinental missile of the type that can carry nuclear warheads.
There has also been an escalation of boots on the ground. Some 10,000 North Korean troops have moved up to the front lines on the Russian side, while last week ministers from the Baltic states and other northern Nato members met to discuss whether to send their troops to Ukraine.
The slippery slope which leads to outright nuclear war between Russia and Nato has moved a step closer.
Cyprus model
Anything that can avert a looming catastrophe must be welcomed. Hence, the new pro-peace Gallup poll provides hope.
Other polls have shown similar findings. But what kind of peace deal is likely? A majority in Gallup’s poll accepts that Ukraine will have to resign itself to a loss of territory in the east in return for a halt to Russia’s aggression.
Ukraine will not have to cede its juridical sovereignty over areas which Russian troops occupy in Donbas and Crimea, but it will have to admit it has lost control.
The model is Cyprus. It is exactly 50 years since Turkey (incidentally, a Nato member) attacked Cyprus and occupied 37 percent of the island. Scores of Greek Cypriots were killed as hundreds of thousands fled.
Later, the UN organised a population swap under which every Turk left the southern part of the island and Greeks left the north. Turkey established a state in northern Cyprus and still keeps 40,000 troops there, but no other country has recognised it.
A UN mission patrols a buffer zone and monitors the ceasefire line. The island has enjoyed peace for more than 40 years.
A few western analysts have advocated a land-for-peace deal in Russia’s war on Ukraine since the beginning of the conflict. But it has been hard to get attention and space in the media for their views. Just as accusations of antisemitism have been weaponised to intimidate critics of Israeli policy in Gaza, those who argue for a ceasefire and negotiations in Ukraine are attacked as being “pro-Putin”.
The Ukrainian poll shows the weakness of the charge. Fifty-two percent of Ukrainians can’t be “pro-Putin”.
Their critique of Zelensky’s aim of victory over Russia is fuelled by realism. In the first days of the war, everyone - and particularly Putin - was surprised by the courage and determination of Ukrainian forces as they blocked Russian tanks from moving south to capture Kyiv, and west to take Kharkiv.
But after a few weeks, the conflict turned into one of trench warfare, an area where Russian forces, with their superior numbers of soldiers, will always be dominant.
Frozen conflict
The continuation of the war will not lead to Putin’s defeat. It simply condemns thousands more Ukrainian troops to death. It means more cities are destroyed by artillery, missile and drone attacks. It delays the day when the millions of Ukrainian refugees can go home.
Western reporters in Ukraine have written admiringly and with sympathy about Ukrainian forces’ determination. Trying to maintain morale, they rarely interview people who want negotiations.
But this self-censorship has begun to lessen. Reporters now cover the huge number of young Ukrainians who are trying to escape conscription. They recount how senior officials and Ukrainian army generals “privately” admit that the war is a frozen conflict and Ukraine will have to concede its loss of territory.
How could negotiations start? Putin has shown no interest in a ceasefire except after Ukraine’s surrender. His troops are gaining ground in the Donbas and he will be reluctant to stop them. He also wants to regain the Kursk region in Russia, which the Ukrainians still hold.
The continuation of the war will not lead to Putin’s defeat. It simply condemns thousands more Ukrainian troops to death
Donald Trump has said he will end the war in a day. There are two months until his inauguration.
If, in January, he can persuade Zelensky and Nato governments, as well as Putin, to have a ceasefire and start peace talks, he will have created the first real prospect of ending the three-year war.
It will be welcomed in Ukraine as well as in Russia, where Gallup’s new findings of a pro-peace majority among Ukrainians are matched by a surge in pro-peace thinking in Russia.
A survey by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the independent Moscow-based Levada Analytical Center at the end of September found that 60 percent of Russians believe the lack of a peace agreement with Ukraine is a critical threat to Russia.
A slight majority, 54 percent, say it is time to start negotiations rather than continue military action.
The chances for peace have never been higher. Western governments should support them.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found here.
