José María Peredo
Professor of International Politics / European University of Madrid
On the first anniversary of the Peloponnesian War, Pericles took advantage of the funeral in which the victims were honoured by remembering their sacrifice to make a memorable political speech on the superiority of the Athenian political system and the value of democracy. He extolled the memory of the fallen and the virtues of democratic tolerance to bolster the morale of the Athenians and their allies during the following stages of the conflict. But the prolongation of the war among the Greeks ended up tearing their civilisation apart, disunited by the rivalry of interests among the city-states, even though they had all together defeated the all-powerful Xerxes a few years earlier.
After the first year of war in Ukraine, the unity of Atlantic and European democratic countries in their support for Ukrainian sovereignty has not been weakened, despite Putin’s attempts to drive a wedge between partners’ convictions. First with energy supply cuts and now with the threat of a major offensive in the spring, the defence of which requires more modern and powerful weapons. The allies, including Germany, have responded to the Ukrainian government’s call with a commitment of Abrams (US), Challenger (UK) and Leopard (Europe) tanks, as well as Patriot missiles and other assets. At the same time, President Zelensky also requested fighter jets.
Although it is not yet possible to speak of an escalation of the war, the movements of the contenders do suggest a change in the strategic scenario, which reinforces the possibility that the armed conflict will increase in magnitude and that the theatres of operations will expand. Although the background to these political and tactical moves could also be aimed at strengthening both the Russian threat and the Ukrainian deterrence capacity, in order to provoke the enemy into accepting negotiations on inferior terms. One of the two options, escalation or deterrent threat, and a third, negotiation, will take precedence over the other two in the coming months.
One year into the conflict, it is time to return to the essential meaning of a funeral speech to share the suffering of the victims, their loved ones, the Ukrainian people and the young soldiers on both sides who have wasted their youth or lost their lives. And also to make some assessments on the meaning of war in the geopolitical heart of Central Europe and on the consequences of Russia’s decision to invade Ukrainian territory, which could prolong the conflict to a point of no return that could be reached at any moment.
In February 2022, Russia took a step forward in Donbas to provoke a step back from the liberal order and gain a more stable geopolitical position for its economic and security interests. But as so often in history, the strategy of strengthening security unilaterally has resulted in the projection of a threat of insecurity in neighbouring countries, which has strengthened the unity of its Western rivals and made Europeans aware of the need for a better coalited and more committed defence policy in terms of resources and the establishment of new shared objectives. As with any military decision, the war has prompted a review of the strategies of the contenders and the countries concerned. These include the enlargement of NATO to the North, the adoption of a New Strategic Concept and the implementation of mechanisms for multi-domain defence and multi-dimensional political action.
Some non-allied powers, such as China and India, have reacted from a position of neutrality. Thinking that political distance would have the immediate or medium-term effect of strengthening their geopolitical and international interests. But after a pitiful year of armed clashes, the outcome of the planned objectives has not produced a weakening of the Atlantic Alliance, nor an advance in military positions, nor a greater capacity for influence from the poles of attraction of Russia, China or any other regional power. No one is stronger than it was, and all powers have been weakened in economic and leadership terms. With the exception, if anything, of the United States, which has taken advantage of the situation to turn the page on its period of war in the Middle East, and has reworked a solvent security and defence strategy that is more coalitioned with its allies and better defined thanks to the information obtained and the practice learned on Ukrainian territory.
After the first year of war in the Peloponnese, Pericles delivered a demagogic and emotional speech calling on Athenians to fight on in a conflict with an uncertain and distant end. Zelensky and Putin today warn of the possibility of a more hostile scenario. Even as evidence suggests that, if strategies are blocked on the ground, the goals of a military offensive are not achievable. And perhaps the time has come to resort to diplomatic negotiation to avoid prolonging the suffering and to reach an agreement that is sufficiently satisfactory and acceptable to the parties involved.
© All rights reserved
