Ukraine Crisis and Europe

Ukraine's fate and future is tied to Europe's autonomy and independence. Everything rests on how we tie these interests and expand this bond.

Autonomy and independence of European Union is possible under the aegis of NATO? If cold war is a thing of past, shouldn't that yardstick also apply to NATO? US-led Nato has repeatedly failed to treat other members at par and take other nations in confidence while acting unilaterally on whatever it has identified in its interest. Can we talk about autonomy and independence for Europe without talking about United States of America and Russia(USSR)?

Autonomy and independence is not only a feature of imagination reconstruction or exclusively belong to the normative domain, it can be attained with real conditions and limits. After, with and beyond the Russian invasion Ukraine's autonomy and independence should be sought within these parameters. Pledges of support and expressions of solidarity with Ukraine are welcome but now that war has broken out, would they suffice?

War is the raison d'etre and best defence for military, arms and weapons to exist. War affects almost dictates distribution and priortisation of resources. Once it breaks out most are wired to think of more, better and advanced weapons and arms. Arms and sale of weapons dominates business and trade among nations and as a result economic boycott and sanctions appear as other forms of 'hard' military options. As long as other co-operations and transactions among and between nation-states play a secondary role ammunition, weapons, arms and war would stay relevant for global order.

Wars among nation-states and within nation-states hasn't been eliminated but few were ready and expecting a war and invasion in Europe in this century. Though it can be plausibly argued that whatever was pursued via Nato and through Ukraine was taking them in this direction. One of the most significant modern political achievement is decline of war that allows us to see war as avoidable and eliminable not inevitable. A war that includes one of the super powers is alarming for this reason. Superpowers do not usually invade their neighbours( 1978 Afganistan, 1956 Hungary and maybe Mexicans and people in Haiti would disagree). Are we at the cusp of a return to old ways of having wars in Europe?

Most nations keep a viable military and treat war as real; factoring their location, neighbours and environment. Ukraine's crisis would have a direct bearing on the future of Europe. A prolonged conflict is more than a sign and indicates that preeminence of Europe has been eclipsed?

This century was touted as Asian century and Russia is not usually counted as part of Asia. Most common folks do not associate Russia( USSR) either with Europe or Asia and in terms of size Russia is continental. Is Russia trying to unhinge itself from the world and be its own continent? And at the first quarter of this century a country that is continental in size is seeking more territory? Or it is dealing with the legacy issues of disintegration of USSR and integration and formation of Russia?

The Ukraine crisis is a direct result of Russia and Europe's inability to come to terms with each other. A term that is fair, equitable  and acceptable to these two parties will never be unfair for Ukraine. Ukraine's adoption of democracy and signing of peace treaties that included giving up its nuclear arsenal cannot count for nothing.

Once war breaks out we are left with damage and destruction. Immediately after war humanity never recedes back to an idealistic image of how the world should be. For the affected regions and people a slide and decline follows war. So the form support for Ukraine assumes and adopts will matter.

When available and known routes, channels and solutions hit a dead-end or criss-cross each other we have a crisis. The longer it takes to overcome the Ukraine crisis the divisions within the world would deepen.