Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has expressed the wish to hold an international conference under the aegis of the United Nations (UN) by the end of February. He would see his secretary general, António Guterres, as a mediator between his country and Russia.
However, he added that Russia should first be prosecuted for war crimes. In the process, he also wants Russia to lose its seat on the Security Council. The Russian embassy at the UN was quick to reject these proposals.
At first sight, they seem unrealistic in the context of the current intensity of the conflict. Yet there is no other international organization better placed than the United Nations to try to bring the parties to the negotiating table. The UN is already involved at many levels in Ukraine through its agencies: humanitarian aid, protection of refugees, securing Ukrainian nuclear power plants.
In addition, a few months ago, the Secretary General of the United Nations had obtained an agreement allowing Ukrainian wheat exports, thus averting a food crisis in many countries.
At this point, it is hard to imagine the end of the fighting as the belligerents say they are convinced of the ultimate victory.
Russian President Vladimir Putin needs military gains as his campaign to take Kyiv and bring down the government of Volodymyr Zelensky is failing. Ukrainians are motivated and receive generous support from much of the international community. They have proven to be formidable fighters and are gradually regaining ground. They hope for total conquest, including the Crimea.
Barring an unlikely collapse of the Russian or Ukrainian forces, the fatigue of the armies and the populations as well as the economic difficulties should nevertheless push them one day or another to want to negotiate. Their respective allies will undoubtedly play an incentive role.
The road to negotiations promises to be long and complicated. Territorial issues, war reparations and abuses of humanitarian law and war will be the main issues.
European security will also have to be on the agenda. As well as the political and economic sanctions adopted by many countries against Russia.
The role of the UN
The United Nations has the necessary experience and credibility as well as the essential neutrality to encourage and implement an eventual peace process.
The major problem is the presence in the Security Council of Russia which, by using its right of veto, can block any resolution or approach which it deems unacceptable. China could do the same. It will therefore be necessary that various actors of the international community are also involved.
One can envisage that a peace settlement could first include the establishment and maintenance of a ceasefire, the organization of referendums, the creation of demilitarized zones, if not the creation of peacekeeping forces. Some of these measures could come under the UN, with Moscow’s consent, others under a willing coalition of countries. Ukraine will want NATO members.
There is already a useful example, that of the Multinational Force and Observers (OFM in English) which verifies the application in the Sinai of the Camp David agreements between Israel and Egypt. It is not UN but is made up of a group of countries accepted by both parties to the treaty, including Canada.
The question of the end of political and economic sanctions against Moscow will be up to the countries that imposed them in the context of the G7 or the European Union.
Examples from the past
The UN has already managed the long mandate of a Commission for Compensation for damages caused by the invasion of Kuwait by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 1990. It is a sum of 50 billion dollars which has been recovered by Kuwait. A model in terms of reconciliation from which we could draw inspiration in the case of Russia.
Apparently, the European Union is already working on the creation of a special tribunal to try war crimes. Russia will obviously do everything to block any possible involvement of the United Nations in this matter.
The Vienna-based Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), an expert in human rights issues, election supervision and arms control, should also be involved in a post – conflictual.
Diplomats can show imagination and their political bosses realism when the time comes to put an end to a major and dangerous conflict for international stability.
Canadian statesman Lester B. Pearson launched an original initiative following the 1956 Suez Canal crisis with the first United Nations peacekeepers. He proved that even if the challenge appears immense, peace and the means to maintain it are possible.
The parties to the conflict must first agree to negotiate. This is obviously not yet the case, unfortunately, but this deadline is inevitable. We have to prepare for it and that includes our government in Ottawa.