Putin badly miscalculated. The Russian army terribly underperformed. Kyiv has shown unexpected resilience in the face of what experts thought was far superior Russian firepower. This, we’re told, is the story of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and all of it is true. Vladimir Putin’s talk of a ‘dirty bomb’ is evidence of how badly the war is going for him. Russia has been taught a bitter lesson, one that other trigger-happy, self-proclaimed great powers would be wise to heed. But one part has been missed. For all of Russia’s difficulties, it is in a far better shape than Ukraine.
Fighting has left Ukraine in ruin. Consider these eye-watering statistics: at least seven million people, mostly women and children, have left the country, from a pre-war population of 37 million, excluding Crimea and some of the Donbas. Some probably hope to return, but many never will. Tens of thousands, at a conservative estimate, have been killed in the fighting. Most of them civilians. There is no understating the demographic blow on Ukraine, which, even in better times, faced declining birth rates and increasing outward migration. It will take them decades to recover from this loss, if it ever does.
Countries in the grey, contested space between great powers should tread with caution
Ukraine’s economy has been battered, too. Whole cities have been levelled to the ground. Mariupol once housed a giant steel complex, Azov steel works, Ukraine’s third largest producer of steel, but the plant has been destroyed. Ukraine’s largest oil refinery, in Kremenchug, was targeted by Russian missile strikes in April, and remains shut. The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the largest of its kind in Europe, which once provided 20 per cent of Ukrainian electricity, has been shut down, and might well be destroyed as the war continues. The country is also being cut off from the outside world. Ukraine’s air connection has been severed and access by sea is limited. That it took a high-level diplomatic intervention from Turkey to restart the export of agricultural products shows how precarious Ukraine’s position is. The World Bank thinks that Ukraine’s economy will have shrunk by 45 per cent this year. That might be optimistic.
Any discussion of Ukraine’s reconstruction is wishful thinking. While the war continues, it’s not feasible for the government to rebuild the country. Private investors will stay away too. You can’t have economic development in a war zone, never mind one that may become a nuclear battleground. Even if an apocalyptic scenario were averted, Russia could well continue crippling Ukraine’s economy with random missile strikes against critical infrastructure. Already Ukraine’s cities face electricity shortages with daily blackouts, a part of Russia’s morale-sapping campaign. There will be no return to normality while this nightmare continues. Ukrainians face a bleak, hard winter, and a very uncertain future.
Ukraine had no choice but to defend itself. Capitulation and annexation were not palatable alternatives. Books will be written about how this war came about, whether Russia’s invasion was inevitable, or whether something could have been done to avert it. But given what we know today of the terrible, tragic consequences of this war, would all those involved have pursued similar policies, or would they have sought a compromise? Putin is responsible for Ukraine’s dire situation, but it is naive and ahistorical to imagine that Kyiv consistently pursued sensible policies, given its unenviable proximity to a dangerous, unpredictable neighbour.
This need not be considered victim-blaming. Someone living in a forest next to a bear’s den would rightly find the prospect of being mauled completely unacceptable, and they would be within their rights to fight back against an attack. Negotiating with a bear is, after all, usually a futile exercise and, indeed, bears don’t understand off-ramps. But, nevertheless, shouldn’t we be careful around wild animals?
Ukraine’s is a tragic lot. The country’s pro-western orientation rattled Putin but the absence of western security guarantees gave him an opening. Ukraine became stuck between a resurgent, militant, imperialistic Russia, and an indignant West, willing to help Ukraine, but unwilling to fight for it. If there is a lesson in this sad situation, it is that countries in the grey, contested space between great powers should tread with caution. Aggressive neighbours don’t have special rights or privileges, but they are capable of inflicting grim damage on their would-be victims, and so must be treated with some (at least superficial) deference.
Treading carefully does not necessarily mean appeasement. There is a vast space between brave defiance and grovelling acceptance. Exploring that space is what makes for good policy. With Ukraine in ruins and reconstruction a distant dream, we should remember that heroics are needed when political foresight fails.
Comments