Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

The Embassy

A Neutral Ukraine: How to Ensure NATO and Russia Don’t Go to War?

Ukraine Donbas
Russian Army tank firing. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

The war for Ukraine is now four weeks old and its initial results have taken most by surprise.

Russia, which was thought to have had a competent military prior to the conflict, has been remarkably inept in its war plans. It has so far suffered 7,000 deaths, which is probably an undercount, and lost millions of dollars in equipment in its botched invasion.

It also miscalculated how the west would respond. NATO has not been this unified since the Cold War, with Turkey supplying Ukraine with drones and Germany committing 100 billion euros to its defense.

Another unexpected surprise was how capable Ukraine has been of defending itself. Many expected that Russia would be in Kyiv by now, and not stuck in a stalemate with most major cities still free from Russian control.

But while such surprises appear to be good news, the situation in Ukraine is unfortunately about to get far more violent. The decision to invade was largely Putin’s call, which means he now owns the outcome. He took a remarkable gamble in Ukraine, and by nearly all accounts it has not paid off. Instead of being welcomed as liberators, he now finds himself in the middle of a potential quagmire with a sinking economy at home. If he were to bring his military home with no policy wins, he would lose all legitimacy among the Russian people and quite possibly his seat in power.

This means that before admitting defeat, Putin will first attempt to terrorize the civilian population into submission.

There are already signs that Russia may be resorting to this very thing, as seen by the specific targeting of civilians in Chernihiv and Mariupol.

This strategy is not new, as Russia used it in Syria and Chechnya once its military got bogged down there. And as demonstrated in those conflicts, Russia has little qualms committing war crimes if it is the only way it can continue making progress on its war objectives.

Unfortunately, America has been notably absent in the diplomatic ongoings of the conflict, with most negotiations being conducted between Ukraine and Russia themselves. Rather than seek a negotiated peace, America has pursued a hard line, seeking to bury the Russian economy under an unprecedented set of sanctions as well as support Ukraine with billions of military aid.

As explained by Secretary of State Blinken, America expects “a strategic defeat” of Putin and Russia, despite any “short-term tactical gains it may make in Ukraine.” The administration will pursue this goal by “remaining united in holding Russia accountable through the devastating sanctions, the diplomatic isolation and other measures.” He also mentioned that “…we’ve already seen that Russia’s failed at its chief objectives. It’s not been able to hold Ukraine. It’s not going to be able to hold Ukraine in the long term — again, no matter what the tactical victories it may achieve are.”

Such an approach is entirely wrong. It may be true that Russia lacks the resources to control Ukraine for the long term, but it does have enough to do a tremendous amount of damage in the short term.

Instead of escalating the conflict, America should be making every sensible attempt to find a diplomatic off-ramp to the crisis.

The good news is that it appears there is one. What Putin wants in return for a cessation of hostilities is simple and was recently laid out by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

One demand is that Ukraine makes credible commitments that its geopolitical orientation remain neutral. This is arguably the most important issue that Russia has with Ukraine and is what motivated the invasion in the first place.

The other Russian demand is on the status of those territories that Russia captured in 2014. This means that Russia wants sovereignty over Crimea and for Donetsk and Lugansk to become independent republics.

These demands should be supported by America, if not openly welcomed. They are minor compromises that have the potential to avoid a great deal of human suffering. America can certainly live with a neutral Ukraine considering it did so for 30 years with no issues. And while it may be unpleasant for America to help facilitate the transfer of former Ukrainian territories, the truth is that they are already under Russian control any way and America would be merely recognizing the reality on the ground.

The bottom line is that America has no security interests in Ukraine, but only humanitarian ones. This means that it should not seek a victory over Russia but an end to the hostilities in Ukraine. So instead of sending more military aid which will only inflame the conflict, America should pursue a diplomatic solution, and help facilitate a negotiated peace based on Russia’s stated demands.

Brian Clark is a foreign policy analyst with a research interest in American grand strategy. His work has been published in The National Interest and The American Conservative.

Written By

Brian Clark is a foreign policy analyst with a research interest in American grand strategy. His work has been published in The National Interest and The American Conservative.



  1. james

    March 19, 2022 at 8:47 am

    Would you give up half your house if i came in and demanded it? Sorry but Crimea, Lugansk and Dontetsk should return to to its owners Ukraine. To say this is okay is outright hypocrisy in your publication!

    I am happy to take half your house btw if it means peace!

  2. Alex

    March 19, 2022 at 11:04 am

    If you look at how many people from Donetsk, Luhansk, Crimea love Russia and held all the necessary referendums, and also asked for help in protecting themselves from genocide, then these people and their regions no longer belong to the murderers and Bandera Nazis. Point, it simply cannot be otherwise.
    NATO will not go to war with Russia over Ukraine, because that would mean a scorched, Britain at the bottom of the ocean and the Canadian-Mexico Strait. And point.

  3. Scott way

    March 19, 2022 at 8:30 pm

    I do not agree. Us doing nothing but asking them to stop terrorizing the Ukrainian people is actually a joke right? So basically what were saying to China, North Korea, Iran and whoever else happens to have a nuclear weapon in the future, is sure go ahead, take whatever chunk of a foreign country you desire. Sure youre gonna suffer financially for a while but fear not, were just gonna stand here and tell you youre wrong! The whole “leave us alone while we murder thousands of innocent people or we’ll use a nuke” bullying tactic has to be squashed. If you think the sanctions are bad now… imagine how the would turns its back on you when you nuke innocent people. I understand that it is an entirely different level of fear that we face as a global community, but its a fear that has to be dealt with. Putin must be stopped. At any cost, and throwing harsh words while taking away his piggy bank isnt going to do it. What’s the world going to do when the entire civillian population of Russia are starving and dying in the streets because sanctions have ruined an entire population? Were gonna send in billions of dollars of food and water and whatever else they need because their autocrat “president” could have used a nuke. The head needs to be cut off. Its unbelievable that there arent any Russian people that are strong enough or smart enough to see through the fear and lies and put an end to Putin once and for all.

  4. Alex

    March 20, 2022 at 12:30 pm

    1. Only the United States has ever used nuclear bombs against civilians.
    2. When the West begins to threaten Russia, the peoples within Russia unite together and around their leader, forming the fist that more than once knocked out the forgetfulness of the united Western army. The only difference is that now Russia will not spare anyone, but will actually destroy everyone who attacks it.
    3. If someone does not know how a Ukrainian was killed in the Donbas 8 years ago by Bandera Nazis, then just sit, shut your mouth and do not get involved in Slavic affairs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.