WAR AND PEACE
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

keynote Paul Wolfowitz
The very important debate on politics of war, the current political culture, the European ideal of civilization and safeguards for peace were at the forefront during the NEXUS Institutes' conference 'WAR and PEACE' on 19 September 2014. For 20 years, this institute studies not only the European cultural heritage in its artistic, ideological and philosophical context in order to provide insight into contemporary issues and to challenge the cultural philosophical debate, but cherises and protects it and brings it to the attention within societies
European history in the last fifty years has been a great success. Several generations of Europeans have lived their whole lives in freedom and have, except an incursion into Georgia and the Ukraine open military conflict, not been witness to war in the Old Continent. This is a valuable legacy that we should all keep in mind and which must be responsibly managed to guarantee its future success. Without peace we will be unable to achieve the levels of cooperation, inclusiveness and social equity required to begin solving these challenges. It is impossible to accurately portray the devastating effects that global challenges will have on us all unless unified global action is taken. Our shared challenges call for global solutions, and these solutions will require cooperation on a global scale unparalleled in human history.

We are in an epoch different to any other epoch in human history.

But why war? How is it that millions of people on the order of a few people deny their human feelings and reason and fall into heinous crimes like murder, looting, treason and arson? Why the obedience of a mass to a ruling power? What force brings peoples in motion? These are the questions to which a bemused Tolstoy tries to answer in War and Peace, his epic about Russia during Napoleon's campaign in 1811-1812.

After two world wars, after Auschwitz, Hiroshima and the Gulag, Europe knew one thing for sure: no more war.
Democracy, economic growth, freedom of expression, education and social justice, became the new values ​​to be ensured that there may be - starting in Europe - never be another war. Leo Tolstoy died in 1910 so he could not see how Europe is now at peace between Member States already seven decades. What forces control this time? How do we keep our humanity? What are the safeguards for peace?

The Nexus Institute invited thirteen international politicians, diplomats, historians and thinkers to discuss on those questions. James Fallon told a newspaper that After the Cold War, you could see all kinds of people wanted to be independent. In the Balkans, East Timor. Many countries, including mine, embraced it. The right to freedom for all. We were naive, we ignored practice: could these entities stand on theirown? The former Soviet republics that belonged since the revolution the Soviet Empire, including Ukraine, were after independence often badly governed and corrupt countries. We are victims of our desires. It's a better way to give up some of our desire for freedom for the benefit of the public interest. Now, weeds insert everywhere its head.

 

The Great Game in Ukraine is Spinning out of Control  
Jeffrey D. Sachs   |   September 28, 2022   |   OtherNews

Former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski famously described Ukraine as a "geopolitical pivot" of Eurasia, central to both US and Russian power.  Since Russia views its vital security interests to be at stake in the current conflict, the war in Ukraine is rapidly escalating to a nuclear showdown.  It's urgent for both the US and Russia to exercise restraint before disaster hits.  

Since the middle of the 19th Century, the West has competed with Russia over Crimea and more specifically, naval power in the Black Sea.  In the Crimean War (1853-6), Britain and France captured Sevastopol and temporarily banished Russia's navy from the Black Sea.  The current conflict is, in essence, the Second Crimean War.  This time, a US-led military alliance seeks to expand NATO to Ukraine and Georgia, so that five NATO members would encircle the Black Sea. 

The US has long regarded any encroachment by great powers in the Western Hemisphere as a direct threat to US security, dating back to the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which states: "We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those [European] powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety."   
 

In 1961, the US invaded Cuba when Cuba's revolutionary leader Fidel Castro looked to the Soviet Union for support.  The US was not much interested in Cuba's "right" to align with whichever country it wanted – the claim the US asserts regarding Ukraine's supposed right to join NATO.  The failed US invasion in 1961 led to the Soviet Union's decision to place offensive nuclear weapons in Cuba in 1962, which in turn led to the Cuban Missile Crisis exactly 60 years ago this month.  That crisis brought the world to the brink of nuclear war.   

Yet America's regard for its own security interests in the Americas has not stopped it from encroaching on Russia's core security interests in Russia's neighborhood.  As the Soviet Union weakened, US policy leaders came to believe that the US military could operate as it pleases.  In 1991, Undersecretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz explained to General Wesley Clark that the US can deploy its military force in the Middle East "and the Soviet Union won't stop us." America's national security officials decided to overthrow Middle East regimes allied to the Soviet Union, and to encroach on Russia's security interests. 

In 1990, Germany and the US gave assurances to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev that the Soviet Union could disband its own military alliance, the Warsaw Pact, without fear that NATO would enlarge eastward to replace the Soviet Union. It won Gorbachev's assent to German reunification in 1990 on this basis.  Yet with the Soviet Union's demise, President Bill Clinton reneged by supporting the eastward expansion of NATO. 

Russian President Boris Yeltsin protested vociferously but could do nothing to stop it.  America's dean of statecraft with Russia, George Kennan, declared that NATO expansion "is the beginning of a new cold war."  

Under Clinton's watch, NATO expanded to Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic in 1999.  Five years later, under President George W. Bush, Jr. NATO expanded to seven more countries: the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), the Black Sea (Bulgaria and Romania), the Balkans (Slovenia), and Slovakia.  Under President Barack Obama, NATO expanded to Albania and Croatia in 2009, and under President Donald Trump, to Montenegro in 2019. 

Russia's opposition to NATO enlargement intensified sharply in 1999 when NATO countries disregarded the UN and attacked Russia's ally Serbia, and stiffened further in the 2000's with the US wars of choice in Iraq, Syria, and Libya. At the Munich Security conference in 2007, President Putin declared that NATO enlargement represents a "serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust." 

Putin continued: "And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended?  And what happened to the assurances [of no NATO enlargement] our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them. But I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr. Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: 'the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee.'  Where are these guarantees?"    

Also in 2007, with the NATO admission of two Black Sea countries, Bulgaria and Romania, the US established the Black Sea Area Task Group (originally the Task Force East).  Then in 2008, the US raised the US-Russia tensions still further by declaring that NATO would expand to the very heart of the Black Sea, by incorporating Ukraine and Georgia, threatening Russia's naval access to the Black Sea, Mediterranean, and Middle East.  With Ukraine's and Georgia's entry, Russia would be surrounded by five NATO countries in the Black Sea: Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Turkey, and Ukraine. 

Russia was initially protected from NATO enlargement to Ukraine by Ukraine's pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych, who led the Ukrainian parliament to declare Ukraine's neutrality in 2010.  Yet in 2014, the US helped to overthrow Yanukovych and bring to power a staunchly anti-Russian government.  The Ukraine War broke out at that point, with Russia quickly reclaiming Crimea and supporting pro-Russian separatists in the Donbas, the region of Eastern Ukraine with a relatively high proportion of Russian population.  Ukraine's parliament formally abandoned neutrality later in 2014.  

Ukraine and Russian-backed separatists in the Donbas have been fighting a brutal war for 8 years.  Attempts to end the war in the Donbas through the Minsk Agreements failed when Ukraine's leaders decided not to honor the agreements, which called for autonomy for the Donbas.  After 2014, the US poured in massive armaments to Ukraine and helped to restructure Ukraine's military to be interoperable with NATO, as evidenced in this year's fighting.   

The Russian invasion in 2022 would likely have been averted had Biden agreed with Putin's demand at the end of 2021 to end NATO's eastward enlargement.  The war would likely have been ended in March 2022, when the governments of Ukraine and Russia exchanged a draft peace agreement based on Ukrainian neutrality.  Behind the scenes, the US and UK pushed Zelensky to reject any agreement with Putin and to fight on.  At that point, Ukraine walked away from the negotiations.  

Russia will escalate as necessary, possibly to nuclear weapons, to avoid military defeat and NATO's further eastward enlargement.  The nuclear threat is not empty, but a measure of the Russian leadership's perception of its security interests at stake. Terrifyingly, the US was also prepared to use nuclear weapons in the Cuban Missile Crisis, and a senior Ukrainian official recently urged the US to launch nuclear strikes "as soon as Russia even thinks of carrying out nuclear strikes," surely a recipe for World War III.  We are again on the brink of nuclear catastrophe.  

President John F. Kennedy learned about nuclear confrontation during the Cuban missile crisis.  He defused that crisis not by force of will or US military might, but by diplomacy and compromise, removing US nuclear missiles in Turkey in exchange for the Soviet Union removing its nuclear missiles in Cuba.  The following year, he pursued peace with the Soviet Union, signing the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. 

In June 1963, Kennedy uttered the essential truth that can keep us alive today: "Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy–or of a collective death-wish for the world."  

It is urgent to return to the draft peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine of late March, based on the non-enlargement of NATO.  Today's fraught situation can easily spin out of control, as the world has done on so many past occasions – yet this time with the possibility of nuclear catastrophe.  The world's very survival depends on prudence, diplomacy, and compromise by all sides. 

 

  conference 'WAR and PEACE
The first panel debated on the international organizations created to turn off war. Who now have the power, and how they deal with their power? The second panel discussed on hope for peace. Can cultural development, civilization and love counterbalance war? How can we learn what love is in a society that is often so uncharitable again?
discussion on war: Paul Wolfowitz, William Fallon, James Rubin, Lilia Shevtsova, Jean Marie Guehenno, Dan Diner and Horia, Roman Patapievici discussion on peace: Lila Azam Zanganeh, Hassan Mneimneh, Avishai Margalit, Robert Cooper and Masafumi Ishii William Fallon Paul Wolfowitz in conversation with Hassan Mneimneh
Guehenno: 'NATO needs to tone down regarding Ukraine. If we raise expectations and then disappoint, we create real danger. 'Idealism is realism! To ignore the power of ideas is very dangerous.' 'If we can't define who we are, others will define us, and this is what got us into the trouble we are in now.' 'Freedom is the fundamental issue, and I believe it must have content; and since 1989, we have only seen a vacuum.'
Fallon: 'US are going to stay involved, but to what extent remains to be seen. We have to take charge of our own situation first. 'We have to get engaged. All of us. Especially those who share the values of humanism. We have a lot of work to do.'
Ignatieff and Cooper: 'What is the politics of peace?' - 'There is none. The only thing is not to begin war.
Margalit: 'Talking about wars in general is not talking about anything at all. Today's wars are civil and particular.
Shevtsova: 'The West pretends nothing is happening in Ukraine, avoiding the word "war".' 'If I were in the Oval Office, I would make Ukraine an American ally without waiting for the NATO.' 'Putin was the first to cross all the red lights.'
Diner: 'Looking back to the 19th century, I feel uncomfortable about France and Germany left alone in the continent.'
Rubin: 'We have to defend the Baltics by drawing the line and showing Putin now.' 'Ukraine is about an old threat, an old problem: a big place called Russia, that broke all the rules of the game.' 'Its a horrible thing done by a fascist regime in Damascus, and the US did nothing. That's the other side of the pendulum . 'Whatever you think of Saddam Hussein, the military operation was performed badly and the US lost respect.'
Wolfowitz: Putin is now demonstrating the effectiveness of military power, and that is what makes him so dangerous. 'Think much that we feared would be the result of arming the Syrian opposition, has happened because we did not. 'We would do better to deal with the dangers in the world than to run away from them.' 'In Syria, the US seems to have hesitated for too long in fear of another Iraq-type situation.' 'The world is still a dangerous place we, the US, need to worry about.' 'Most troubling of all have been Putin's dealings in Ukraine.' 'The west can take a bit of credit for progress in the world.' 'The west walked away and left Libya to Islamist groups'. 'It was premature to declare an Arab Spring, but it is premature now to declare an Arab Winter.' 'Indonesia's democratic transition has been more successful than Egypt's due to its civil society'. 'The world today is much more prosperous and free than it was 50 years ago.' 'Too often, we seem to think that the threat of force is something that only comes into play when negotiations fail'.
Ignatieff: A world of 200 states that don't kill others and don't kill themselves, that's something, that's a better world.' 'Every time we stop war from happening, we win an important victory.' 'I teach human rights and I think these enlightenment ideals cannot be agreed on. It is a battle from beginning to end.
Mneimneih: 'We are living in the illusion that we still live in a framework of shared values.
Ishii: 'I still believe US is indispensable in international conflicts, but not sufficient. We need a group of leaders
Cooper: 'In Western Europe we had 70 years of peace, and for this we have to thank America.
Azam Zanganeh: 'The real challenge today for peace is to believe in the universal ideal and value born in Enlightenment Europe.