Why Ending Ukraine War as Early as Possible Should Get Universal Support

The ongoing Ukraine-Russia War has been among the most tragic conflicts of recent times, in terms of the huge loss of life and other extreme human distress this has caused.

In terms of very high risks of escalation into a much bigger war, possibly a nuclear war and the third world war, this has been the most dangerous war of this century so far.

Rather late in the day, in recent weeks possibilities of ending this war have suddenly increased, even though several problems and difficulties remain to be sorted out.

This is a time to seize the opportunity of peace before it slips way. Hence this is a time when efforts for ending this war as early as possible should get everyone’s support.

In this context I would like to quote at some length from a recent article of Jack F. Matlock Jr. which appeared very recently (March 3, 2025) in Responsible Statecraft. Matlock, who was the US Ambassador to the Soviet Union during the crucial years of 1987-91, has long been one of the most reasonable and well-informed voices on this war, and more generally on Russia and Ukraine, particularly in terms of relations with the west and with NATO.

In his recent article titled ‘Trump and the Viable Road to Peace’ he has argued convincingly that ending the Ukraine war as early as possible is an issue far too important to be interpreted narrowly in the context of the support-base of President Trump. Matlock writes—“I did not vote for Trump and have been critical of most of his moves. But in regard to the war in Ukraine and relations with Russia, I believe he is on the right track.”

Matlock says, “President Trump and his foreign policy team have created the conditions for a negotiated end to war…replacing a fundamentally flawed and dangerous set of policies.” Therefore, Matlock adds, “Anyone interested in peace rather than the threat of nuclear war should be congratulating President Trump.”

On the other hand on preceding western policies which led to such a high risk situation, Matlock (who had contributed in no small measure to a peaceful end to the cold war) says, “I have been appalled that a succession of American Presidents and European leaders discarded the diplomacy that ended the Cold War, abandoned the agreements that curbed the nuclear arms race, and provoked the nuclear war that has now become hot.”

While warning that peace negotiations may still be difficult and lengthy, Matlock expresses relief that “at last the American President has defined a viable road to peace and the Russian President has greeted this effort.”

So at last we have at least some solid hope of achieving relatively early peace and ending the most dangerous war so far of the 21^st century. So at least at this stage all the war-mongers who have been fuelling and prolonging this war in various ways should stop this and extend their sincere support to peace efforts.

Unfortunately some of them are still persisting with their old ways. In the prevailing conditions they cannot openly say that the war should go on so in terms of war-mongering in a different way they try to present peace proposals that are not at all realistic and therefore will take us nowhere, resulting ultimately in continuation of war.

Our request to all these persons, organizations and forces—please stop this at least now, and please do not obstruct the path to peace any more.

Why are some western leaders still obstructing the path of early peace? Is this because they want to somehow maintain continuity with their earlier high level of aggression which was wrong then and is even more out of place now? Instead why not admit earlier mistakes if this helps the cause of peace? However  perhaps this is not just a matter of obstinately persisting with the earlier stand on this issue and perhaps, now that the USA is no longer using Ukraine in a proxy war with Russia, some other countries want to do so, despite their much lesser ability to commit adequate resources for this.

There should be all the sympathy for the ordinary people of Ukraine who have suffered enormously but there should be no sympathy for those leaders who were responsible to a large extent for Ukraine’s road to massive destruction. The most sensible policy for Ukraine would have been to maintain cordial relations with both the west and Russia, trying to secure benefits from both sides. By allowing Ukraine to be used as a proxy of the west in its publicly admitted strategy to weaken Russia, these narrow-minded and self-centered leaders pushed Ukraine on the path first to civil war and then to war. Even at a very early stage of the Russian invasion and before this at an early stage of the civil war, there were several opportunities to establish peace which were not accepted by these leaders of Ukraine. Zelensky won elections on a platform of peace but went in the opposite direction. Having used his power as the top leader in ways that have led to the most massive distress and huge loss of life in conditions that are widely admitted to be hugely corrupt, why should Zelensky get our respect and sympathy?

The path ahead must be based on peace as early as possible and this has three aspects. Firstly, continuing loss of life should stop. Secondly, high risks of escalation to a much wider and more dangerous war should end. Thirdly, massive reconstruction and rehabilitation work for the people of Ukraine should start.          

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, Man over Machine and A Day in 2071.