US President Joe Biden has characterised the war between Russia and Ukraine as a “needless act of aggression”, a “premeditated war that will bring a catastrophic loss of life and human suffering” for which “Russia alone is responsible”.
UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres made an appeal to Russian President Vladimir Putin to respect the UN Charter, which says members should refrain “from the threat or use of force” against other states. Guterres has, correctly, condemned Putin — as have most leaders around the world.
What is clear is that Putin is unmoved. The higher the decibels in his condemnation, the more bombs he drops, the more terrified civilians flee Kharkiv, Lviv, Chernihiv and other cities bordering Russia.
The condemnations must not stop. The sobering reality, though, is that condemnation, even if supplemented by sanctions against Putin and his lieutenants, has not, and may not, bring a stop to the mayhem.
Russia’s military offensive in Ukraine, expected to displace millions as casualties increase with each passing day, has burst open a difficult but necessary discourse on the fragility of world peace.
What is the responsibility of the world, and the UN in particular, to ensure that the aggression is stopped, and that loss of life and human suffering are minimised? Biden ended his statement by saying he and his wife are “praying for the brave and proud people of Ukraine”. Hardly enough to reassure the besieged Ukrainians.
Putin has placed the world on notice, reminding it that Russia is a nuclear superpower and warning that “any potential aggressor will face defeat and ominous consequences”, in a statement clearly calculated to paralyse other superpowers.
Those ducking bombs and facing gunfire in Ukraine are frustrated by the flat-footed response of the global community and hope for much more than condemnation.
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has criticised world leaders for “watching from afar”, demanding “effective counteraction to the Russian Federation”.
With each passing hour since the invasion, and as Ukraine edges closer to a predictable loss, it is clear the world has no systems to stop acts of war.
Guterres could only make ineffectual appeals and promise humanitarian assistance. Biden could only express outrage from the comfort of the White House, while the UK, geographically closer, could only release statements about strengthening sanctions that Putin and his lieutenants have no regard for.
Is the UN only good for helping to mitigate the refugee crisis?
Meanwhile, ordinary people in Ukraine are left to fight a war they are never going to win.
What is worse is that the Kremlin has now issued direct threats to Finland and Sweden, which, like Ukraine, have been contemplating membership of Nato, which Putin sees as a dangerous adversary.
World leaders have been reduced to spectators in an unfolding catastrophe they should be helping to mitigate. It is clear that since World War 1 and the inception of the League of Nations, the UN’s predecessor, the world has not been able to establish a system to stop acts of aggression from superpowers, such as the invasion of Ukraine.
In SA, President Cyril Ramaphosa appealed for mediation to stop the war but could not bring himself to condemn Russia, for reasons that are obvious.
It will be close to pointless to try to hold Russia accountable once innocent lives have been lost and property destroyed. How is that in keeping with a just world order? Is the UN only good for helping to mitigate the refugee crisis by providing food and medicine to the displaced in tents?
The world, in truth, has been reduced to a powerless observer of Putin’s wanton destruction.
If this war teaches us one thing, it is the urgency with which the UN and the global community need to have a meeting of minds on how to respond to aggression from — especially — nuclear-armed superpowers.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.