The Other Side: It is not enough

The Ukrainians have been telling us that it is not enough. So how much longer must they wait for us to realize that they’re absolutely right.

There is something so very terrifying about seeing what Putin has done to Mariupol, literally crushing the heart of the city. Add the most recent photos of the war crimes committed in Bucha. So many homes, so many rooms once filled with the memories of so many years. Can you imagine the great hatred that has prompted those bombs? The torture and cold-blooded murder. In cities and suburbs, the extraordinary effort of Putin and the Russians to look away from the faces of the children, the parents, and their parents, to trash the books and pots and pans, the tools of daily life, to obliterate the so many days and weeks and months and years of work it took to accumulate those things. What utter cruelty fuels such extermination? And on top of this terror, pro-Putin propagandists try to tell us that this horror is the staged work of the Ukrainians themselves.

As the New York Times’ analysis reveals: “When images emerged over the weekend of the bodies of dead civilians lying on the streets of Bucha — some with their hands bound, some with gunshot wounds to the head — Russia’s Ministry of Defense denied responsibility. In a Telegram post on Sunday, the ministry suggested that the bodies had been recently placed on the streets after ‘all Russian units withdrew completely from Bucha’ around March 30.

“Russia claimed that the images were ‘another hoax’ and called for an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting on what it called ‘provocations of Ukrainian radicals’ in Bucha. But a review of videos and satellite imagery by The Times shows that many of the civilians were killed more than three weeks ago, when Russia’s military was in control of the town.”

Here, we are so very removed from the battle, the reality of broken bodies, buildings once vibrant, now burnt out. Anyone who has lived for any time in a city, knows a city never sleeps. I’ve been in the Berkshires for close to 50 years now but I still prefer walking city streets to country roads. With the remarkable, ever-changing carousel of faces, the storefronts, the shoppers, the street cars. It must be so very hard to walk through the ruins of Mariupol and Bucha. To know the dead are still there.

No wonder we are talking two different languages. Here, in the United States, there is so much talk about Vladimir Putin and what he wants, what he might be willing to do, and what it would take to provide an off-ramp for him. And always Putin’s ability to bring the nuclear winter to us all. Plus what a danger it would be for us to help in any way enable a no-fly zone.

And yet, together, Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Janša, Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala, Polish Prime MinisterMateusz Morawiecki, and Jarosław Kaczyński, the leader of Poland’s Law and Justice Party, visited Ukraine. The Poles have known Soviet occupation, and suffered mass murder at the hands of the Soviets. Just recently, they have modified their laws to provide medical care and schooling for the more than 1 million Ukrainian refugees they have taken in. This what Morawiecki had to say about the challenges facing NATO and Europe:

“In Kyiv, there is a battle being waged — not only for the future of Ukraine, but also for the future of the entire Continent. And if Kyiv falls, it will be the end of Europe as we know it. A month has passed since Russia launched its full-on assault on Ukraine. Since then, the West has imposed four packages of sanctions on Russia — and yet the war continues. The measures are clearly not enough. Much more needs to be done, and quickly.

“To those who warn that provoking Russian President Vladimir Putin will lead to World War III, I ask: Did Putin ever need an excuse to violate international law? Did he need one to attack Georgia? Did he need one to occupy Crimea? Did he need one to attack Kyiv?

“The passivity of politicians on the eve of World War II did not stop Hitler; it gave him more room for action. Our task today is to not repeat that same mistake. The people I talked to while in Kyiv have more courage than the leaders of the world’s largest countries. But they need more than just compassion or statements of solidarity. They need real support.” [Emphasis added]

Unlike so much of what we hear from safe-and-sound American politicians, hoping their pronouncements will resonate with their voters, and from American pundits, paid by the word, none of what Morawiecki is saying is rhetorical. He knows our response is not enough.

Some personal history. When I was young in New York City, no matter where we began our peace marches, we ended up at the United Nations. Of course, at the end, there was the added benefit of a stop at the automat as we walked crosstown to the subway.

There was something about all those flags, the hope that the collective intelligence, the shared commitment to international cooperation might prevail. Of course, the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the images of the devastation of World War II were still with us. In my neighborhood, each time the owner of the candy store leaned over to put my egg cream on the counter, his concentration camp numbers were visible.

Nuclear disarmament wasn’t some abstract issue. Even if we wanted to, we couldn’t pretend nuclear devastation wasn’t real: there were the air raid drills and dog tags we wore to identify us, and the continuing near-impossible attempts to squeeze our growing bodies underneath our desks — always facing away from the windows sure to shatter as the Russian missiles fell on the city.

In a way, I have lived my entire life under the shadow of annihilation, and watching the devastation of Mariupol, it doesn’t take much to see once more the many windows and desks of P.S. 86, and re-live what I always knew what was a remarkably stupid attempt to deny the obvious: there was no escape. Sometimes our teachers would have us dispense with the desks and line up outside the classrooms and enact an orderly evacuation outside the building. As if we would be safer on Reservoir Avenue.

And, by the way, in the 1950s — the heyday of our anti-Communist hysteria — and into the early ’60s, demonstrating for peace wasn’t easy. Looking back, despite the great optimism that motivated us, and our instinctive understanding that a policy of mutually-assured destruction, a never-ending arms race, was sheer madness, it’s clear this was never a fair fight. Our numbers steadily increased. The many, many millions over those years marching for peace versus the extraordinary influence of the masters of war. The ability of those who President Dwight Eisenhower, a bit too late, called the military-industrial complex to shape American foreign and domestic policy.

Certainly, when it came to insisting on nuclear disarmament, the United Nations failed miserably. Of course, a Security Council under the control of the five major powers, including the U.S. and Soviet Union, each with a resolution-killing veto, would never stop the nuclear nations from building more missiles, missiles ever more lethal and accurate. And, naturally, other nations followed suit and joined the club.

I imagine my younger self would be disappointed to learn I have gotten used to living with nuclear annihilation. Exiling the great clear and present danger to the deepest recesses of my consciousness, the ever-constant possibility that a stupid man, an angry bitter man, a psychopath might push the button that would spark the other button pushers.

It seems that as long as humans have walked the earth, some have been looking for and finding bigger rocks. Sharper rocks. Better guns. Once again, we are left watching with profound sadness, as men driven by some profound defect, wage wars of choice, and not necessity.

And all the while, there have been the talkers, the explainers — at the end of the day, the justifiers. Because while the power-hungry often don’t have the need to explain, there are the thousands who surround them and excuse them, whose job it is to provide cover for the cruelty, and, in return, profit in large and small ways: getting rich, feeling privileged, just plain surviving to live another day. Then, add the many able to turn away from war, and party on, as if it wasn’t happening.

There’s always an authoritarian response to the peace seekers. Sometimes, as in Russia today, with jail, sometimes with exile, and in those cases that don’t warrant drastic action, with disparagement. In my youth, there was the word offered us a thousand times: “realpolitik” — a politics based on practical, rather than moral or theoretical or ethical objectives. Those of us marching for peace were naïve at best, or worse, enabling the enemy with our dissent.

While the nuclear threat never really dissipated, our attention and our desire for peace was diverted to all the thankfully non-nuclear wars America was engaged in, our wars of choice: Vietnam, Central America, Afghanistan, Iraq.

I want to be very clear: the failure to create strong powerful institutions of peace and security, guarantors of self-determination and social equity, international agencies able to provide for the robust protection of the less powerful from the expansionist aims of the more powerful, has forced some to wage wars of purpose: for survival, for independence, against tyranny. Ukraine.

At this very moment, it is so very apparent that the self-imposed lack of will at the U.N., the failures of the European Union and NATO itself, has forced Ukrainians to muster every ounce of energy to repel a Russian invasion. Russia has denied them the choice to live in peace, forcibly shattered the possibility of a normal life. Could there be a more obvious declaration of genocide than the bombing of a maternity ward? The execution of civilians, whose hands have been tied behind their backs? Ukraine has been offered a simple choice: surrender independent living, liberty, and the right to choose their government, or fight and die.

For the rest of us watching, there’s the mind-boggling attempt to come to grips with the unavoidably obvious mystery. Why aren’t we stopping it? That mystery took me into a belated reexamination of past attempts at peacemaking.

A quick look at how the United Nations administers its peacekeeping operations makes it easier to understand its failures: “The Security Council has primary responsibility, under the United Nations Charter, for the maintenance of international peace and security. It is for the Security Council to determine when and where a UN peace operation should be deployed.

“The Security Council establishes a peace operation by adopting a Security Council resolution. The resolution sets out that mission’s mandate and size … Under Article 25 of the Charter, all UN members agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council. While other organs of the UN make recommendations to Member States, the Council alone has the power to take decisions which Member States are obligated to implement.”  [Emphasis added]

There are, though, cases where the UN General Assembly can move beyond its limited mandate when it comes to matters of war and peace. Perhaps, the Assembly can intervene in this case: “In accordance with the General Assembly’s Uniting for Peace resolution of November 1950’ if the Security Council fails to act, owing to the negative vote of a permanent member, then the General Assembly may act. This would happen in the case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression. The General Assembly can consider the matter with a view to making recommendations to Members for collective measures to maintain or restore international peace and security.

“This resolution was invoked only once in UN peacekeeping history, when in 1956 the General Assembly established the First UN Emergency Force (UNEF I) in the Middle East.”

There are, at present, 12 different peacekeeping efforts being undertaken by the United Nations Department of Peace operations. To get an idea of what’s involved, here’s a look at the UNIFIL mission in Lebanon. The mission began in 1978 to ensure that Israel withdrew its military force and with several changes, continues today. In 2006, in the midst of yet more violence, the Security Council added more numbers to “monitor the cessation of hostilities; accompany and support the Lebanese armed forces as they deploy throughout the south of Lebanon; and extend its assistance to help ensure humanitarian access to civilian populations and the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons.”

For the time period July 2021–June 2022, the General Assembly has approved a special fund of $510,251,500. But members well understand, beyond the money, lives are lost in keeping the peace, and 324 members of the team have died.

Other peacekeeping efforts are taking place in the Western Sahara, the Central African Republic, Mali, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Golan, Cyprus, Abyei, Kosovo, South Sudan, India and Pakistan, the Middle East.

Today, as they endure unending terror, the Ukrainians with Vladimir Zelensky provide a constant contrast to the invader and the dictator, holding up a mirror to us all. What kind of world do we want to live in? How should we respond when the desire to live in peace is challenged by such barbarous behavior?

For the moment, we seem stuck in a stalemate. We are witnesses to never-ending war crimes. For me this feeling is familiar. I remember how maddening it was to see our tax money so egregiously enable the indiscriminate bombing of Vietnam and Cambodia, the trainings at the School of the Americas of the armies and police of the Central American despots. Whose soldiers then used their new-found skills to kill nuns and labor leaders and enforce the will of the fabulously wealthy plantation owners, the friends and families of Duarte in El Salvador, or the corrupt Somozas in Nicaragua. Then watching our armed forces fight and die while enormous amounts of our money went into the pockets of corrupt Afghans, Iraqis, and one incompetent regime replaced another, while the civilian population suffered some more.

Now, the crimes are being perpetrated by the Russians. With their own version of the false claims of American politicians and military men used to justify our interventions. With their own ever-constant lies about how well they’re doing.

Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction have morphed into the non-existent chemical warfare factories and Ukrainian plans to invade Russia, and Zelensky’s discrimination against Russian speakers within Ukraine. Remember the dominos and the need to purge the Communists. Now Putin tells us he needs to purge the Nazis.

The lies continue. Pretending to negotiate. Creating a purported humanitarian corridor only to remove women and children from Mariupol to Russian controlled territory under a policy they call filtration. Old-fashioned kidnapping, whatever cute name they come up with.

The problem is, as Zelensky told the Parliament in the Netherlands: “Russia has been preparing for this campaign against us, against freedom, against our people for decades. They have accumulated as many resources to spend on war, on death, as not every European country can spend on life.

“And now these Russian resources are working at full capacity and, by the way, tirelessly … No matter how scary it may sound, people are already getting used to it. The world is beginning to adapt. They start to ignore everything they hear about the war. They are getting used to the news about the new bombing of our peaceful cities. About new missile strikes. They are getting used to the updated lists of those killed. Daily reports of the number of destroyed houses and shelled cities and communities no longer evoke emotions. For many others, the war in Ukraine is becoming routine. Unfortunately, this is true. Routine. But not for those whose lives are in danger every minute.” [Emphasis added]

Sadly, the international response has been slow and inadequate. International humanitarian organizations like the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) believe that if they are to work in the midst of conflict they must scrupulously preserve a rigorous policy of neutrality. In this case, the Russians again and again sabotage efforts at creating safe passage for aid and evacuation. Sadly, ICRC efforts at creating safe humanitarian corridors for people to leave the besieged city of Mariupol have been mostly unsuccessful.

And yet, as the ICRC acknowledges, the need for relief is critical: “As the international armed conflict in Ukraine enters its fifth week, the level of death, destruction and suffering that continues to be inflicted on civilians is abhorrent and unacceptable. A month after the escalation of the conflict, the ICRC is scaling up in 10 different locations in Ukraine, including Kyiv, Poltava, Dnipro, Odessa, to address the rapidly evolving situation. Trucks are moving across the country to provide medical supplies and other assistance whilst other convoys with essential aid will arrive in the coming days.

“The conditions civilians are facing in Mariupol are becoming increasingly dire. Our team in Mariupol describes the situation in the city as ‘apocalyptic.’ People are living with no food, no water, no heat, no electricity. They need urgent respite from violence and humanitarian assistance.

“Over the last five weeks, the ICRC has been speaking with Russian and Ukrainian authorities about their obligations under international humanitarian law (IHL) and what practical steps must be taken to limit the suffering of civilians and those who no longer participate in hostilities, including the wounded, sick, and prisoners of war (POWs). To the ICRC’s great concern, the parties are yet to meet many of their core obligations under IHL or reach consensus on key issues that only they can concretely deliver on.”

While I appreciate the need for even-handedness, I’m a bit unclear about how you can equate the behavior of those being bombed with those doing the bombing. Those who from great distances are clearly targeting civilian neighborhoods, while the Ukrainian soldiers conduct highly focused counterattacks on tanks and personnel carriers and invading infantry. So far as I know no Russian civilians have been attacked. On April 1, 2022 the Russians claimed two Ukrainian helicopters attacked an oil refinery over the Russian border, but this is the first report of a Ukrainian incursion.

The ICRC is legitimately concerned with the condition of captured Russian soldiers. And, given the indiscriminate attacks on civilian targets, I imagine there is enormous anger directed by Ukrainians at them. But it is clear that the Ukrainians have so much to gain from the delivery of critically important humanitarian supplies while the Russians seem more focused than ever on mercilessly punishing the Ukrainian people. Obliterating their nation.

While, recognizing its current limitations, in March 2018 the UN Secretary-General launched Action for Peacekeeping (A4P) in an effort to renew the United Nations’ commitment to peacekeeping operations. The chart below shows some of their successes. And the lack of any UN Peacekeeping force in Ukraine is evidence of the crucial need for just such an international effort today:

In no way, do I want to minimize the important efforts of the United Nations. As UN Secretary-General António Guterres noted in his statement to reporters on March 28, 2022, the UN has been very active in providing humanitarian assistance:

“In the past month, beyond their support to refugee hosting countries, our humanitarian agencies and their partners have reached nearly 900,000 people, mainly in eastern Ukraine, with food, shelter, blankets, medicine, bottled water, and hygiene supplies. There are now more than 1,000 United Nations personnel in the country, working via eight humanitarian hubs in Dnipro, Vinnytsia, Lviv, Uzhorod, Chernivitzi, Mukachevo, Luhansk and Donetsk.

“The World Food Programme and partners reached 800,000 people in the past month and are scaling up to reach 1.2 million people by mid-April. The World Health Organisation and partners have reached more than half a million people in the most vulnerable areas with emergency health, trauma and surgery kits.

“Just today a convoy of trucks brought food, medical and other relief supplies from WFP, WHO, UNHCR, UNICEF to Kharkiv, to be delivered by our national partners to thousands of people in hard-hit areas. Our agencies and partners are procuring vital supplies and setting up pipelines for delivery throughout Ukraine in the coming weeks.

“But let’s be clear. The solution to this humanitarian tragedy is not humanitarian. It is political.

I am therefore appealing for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, to allow for progress in serious political negotiations, [aimed] at reaching a peace agreement based on the principles of the United Nations Charter.”

Sadly, The New York Times wrote about a recent failure: “The Red Cross said it had expected about 54 buses, along with an unknown number of private vehicles, to take part in an evacuation convoy carrying thousands of people. It said two trucks filled with food, water and medicines were supposed to accompany its team into Mariupol, but it did not receive permission to deliver from the Russians to deliver the aid, and left the trucks behind.”

To counter the refusal of the Russians to allow humanitarian aid, I believe the rest of the world must actively intervene to create and defend humanitarian corridors to ensure delivery of food and water and medicine to besieged Ukrainians, and to establish safe passages away from the constant bombardments in cities like Mariupol.

Think of this as a safekeeping effort, coordinated by the countries of the European Union and NATO. To introduce defensive military forces focused entirely on humanitarian, peacekeeping efforts. To guarantee with their presence the ability of organizations like UNICEF, José Andrés’ World Central Kitchen, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and medical teams like those from Doctors Without Borders to safely attend to the needs of the civilian population. These will be troops whose mission is entirely about protecting non-combatants, the very young and old, those who desperately need to move to safety.

I early on joined The Student Peace Union (SPU) and proudly wore my peace pin. Today, we need many millions to resurrect this symbol.

It’s clear that in the same ways we filled the streets around the world to protest the invasion of Iraq, we must in great numbers pressure our governments to re-configure the vital mission of the United Nation’s Peacekeeping efforts: “to deploy troops and police from around the world” to protect the many hundreds of thousands of civilians and to help “guarantee cease fires.”

Mateusz Morawiecki and his European colleagues suggested a 10-point plan which builds upon current efforts to support Ukraine and the pressure on Russia to end the war:

1. Preventing Russian banks from using the international payment protocol, SWIFT
2. Offering asylum to Russian soldiers who refuse to fight
3. Stopping Russian propaganda in Europe
4. Blocking Russian ships from our ports
5. Blocking road transport in and out of Russia
6. Imposing sanctions not only on the oligarchs but their entire business environment
7. Suspending visas for all Russian citizens who want to enter the EU so that they understand the consequences of this war, with the hope they will turn their backs on Putin
8. Imposing sanctions on all members of Putin’s party, United Russia
9. Imposing a total ban on the export to Russia of technologies that can be used for war
10. Excluding Russia from all international organizations.

Beyond these ten points, they urged a major expansion of military aid and support: “In Kyiv, we proposed a peacekeeping mission under the aegis of NATO and other international organizations. If we cannot introduce effective sanctions, we have no choice: We must protect the people of Ukraine with our own shields.

“If we want to restore peace, Putin needs to know where the red line is — the line he cannot cross. The fact that Russia has a nuclear arsenal cannot be an excuse for passivity. We must be cognizant of this threat, but it cannot hold us back. Otherwise, Putin will only go further.

“What will we do if Putin reaches for Chisinau, the capital of Moldova, next? Or if he attacks Vilnius and Warsaw? What if he wants to occupy Helsinki? Will we start taking this threat seriously only when he sends tanks to Berlin? The line must be drawn, and it must be drawn now.

“The plan we propose is not only possible, it is necessary. We must find the courage not to turn our backs on Ukraine’s suffering and to face this historic challenge.” [Emphasis added]

When confronted with the ever-increasing brutality his people are enduring, [Zelensky] contrasted the daily bravery of their resistance with the unwillingness of the Western powers to stop Russian aggression: “I’ve talked to the defenders of Mariupol today … Their determination, heroism and firmness are astonishing … If only those who have been thinking for 31 days on how to hand over dozens of jets and tanks had one percent of their courage.”

On April 3, Zelensky, realizing that increased Western intervention might not be coming anytime soon, urged the Ukrainian people to do everything and anything they can to persevere together in their war for freedom and independence: “Another day of our defense has passed. Another day of many that are gradually, with difficulties, but steadily bringing us closer to peace. To peace that no one will give us a gift. We need to understand it clearly.

“The global security architecture has failed. Peace for us will not be the result of any decisions of the enemy somewhere in Moscow as well. We should not cherish empty hopes that they will simply leave our land. We can only gain peace. We can gain it in hard battles and in parallel – in negotiations, and in parallel – in daily vigorous work.

“Therefore, each of us must continue to do everything we can. In all directions. To support our Armed Forces. To preserve and develop economic activity in Ukraine – as much as possible now.

To support all our citizens … Wherever they are, whoever they are.

“When people defend themselves in a war of annihilation, when there is a question of the lives or deaths of millions, there are no unimportant things. There are no unimportant moments. Everything matters. And everyone can contribute to the victory of all. Someone with a weapon in their hands. Someone – at work. And someone – with a warm word and help at the right time.

“So do everything you can for us to withstand together in this war for our freedom, for our independence. For Ukraine to live.

“Unfortunately, Ukraine has not yet received enough modern Western anti-missile systems. Has not received aircraft. Hasn’t received what the partners could provide. Could – and still can! Every Russian missile that hit our cities and every bomb dropped on our people, on our children only adds black paint to the history that will describe everyone on whom the decision depended. Decision whether to help Ukraine with modern weapons.

“I would like to thank the residents of our Enerhodar separately. Those brave Ukrainians who went to a rally today to defend their city. To protect our state. In response, the occupiers opened fire and used grenades against completely peaceful people, which are on their land, within their law. There will be an answer for each wounded person. And the Ukrainian character cannot be conquered by any pressure or violence.

“I am grateful to everyone who takes to the streets in the temporarily occupied cities. To all who are not afraid and go out. I am grateful to all who are afraid and come out. To all those who feel that without this decision to defend Ukraine and their freedom, the occupiers can gain a foothold. And when people protest – and the more people protest – the harder it is for the occupiers to destroy us, to destroy our freedom. This is our common struggle! And it will be our common victory.”

The Ukrainians are not the only ones who suffer for the lack of strong international institutions who will defend human rights, self-determination, and the ability to live in peace. I marched as a boy to the United Nations dreaming of nuclear disarmament. All these years later, my country and the countries of Europe are failing to stop genocide for fear of those same weapons.

I’m with Mateusz Morawiecki: we cannot let our fear of nuclear war keep us from preventing more mass murder and the increasingly brutal occupation of a people who want to live in peace. We must insist on international peacekeepers. It is, as Zelensky insists, a common struggle. And we desperately need a common victory.