How to end the war if after six months of war,

How to end the war if after six months of war,

“In these times, when the world is so evolved, after six months of destructive and bloody war in the heart of Europe, ‘How do we get out of this nightmare?’ This is the question we must ask ourselves in trying to find a realistic answer, rather than continuing to reiterate the indefinite support for Ukraine, which obviously cannot be lacking, but which becomes sterile or even counterproductive if we do not fight for a way to negotiated exit.

And the first to mobilize in this regard are the political parties in the country, which, in view of the September 25 elections, should talk about it, proposing an idea, a calendar, a weak light at the end of the tunnel.

It’s just a pity that they do the exact opposite, war seems taboo and only the “collateral” effects that concern us closely, like for example the increase in the price of gas, are treated. Correct, but the problem must be solved by addressing the core of the conflict, which on the eve of Ukraine’s independence, with fears of a Russian military storm, real or supposed, revealed the balance of blood already spilled”, notes Fausto Biloslavo in an article for

Specifically, General Valerii Zalujnii, the commander of the Ukrainian army, admitted that almost 9,000 soldiers were killed. The CIA, with more reliable estimates than the numbers known so far, indicates Russian losses somewhere around 15 thousand people. Civilian casualties reach 5 thousand, and children killed or injured are 942, with a terrible average of 5 per day.

In the comparative context, in the eight years of the previous war in Donbas, underestimated and forgotten by the international community, the number of victims reached 14 thousand, slightly less than half of those of the last six months. The burden of blood, in addition to the serious negative consequences, not only economic, should lead us to find a solution as soon as possible to avoid precipitating into an endless war of attrition.

This does not mean that we should abandon the fate of the Ukrainians or cancel the sanctions because they do more harm to us, to those who imposed them and less to Russia. Or stick to Prime Minister Draghi’s line, which is officially the European line, to continue supplying arms to Kiev, reaffirming that it is the Ukrainians who must decide on peace. It is obvious that the invaded country will choose its destiny, but the tools of aid and military sanctions should not only serve to make Ukraine last to the last man.

On the contrary, they are a lever to convince President Zelenski to opt for the path of negotiations for the good of his people and the whole of Europe. The Ukrainians cannot win this war by driving the Russians across the border except through an armed NATO intervention, which would mean an impossible and suicidal nuclear conflict.

Any negotiation is made up of small steps

At the moment, any negotiations consist of small steps, such as unlocking grain and, it is hoped, securing the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant. And it can start from a freeze of positions to reach a lasting truce. Then, one by one, the most thorny problems must be addressed: Kherson, through a real referendum, Mariupol, a city opened thanks to the UN police, Donbas, just like South Tyrol full of Italian blue helmets.

Odessa, untouchable in exchange for painful amputations, but which have already taken place, like Crimea. All the proposals, right or wrong, that should be made by the politicians fighting to govern Italy. After the first six months of war without progress, it is not enough to pledge allegiance to NATO and Uncle Sam or to think that we can solve everything by removing sanctions.

Until now, the only ones who managed to do something were the Turks. For better or for worse, they are NATO allies supplying armed drones to the Ukrainians, but they are talking to Vladimir Putin. Even the Russians will realize that they will never be able to win 100% and that the price of the “special operation” is becoming far too high. For this, directly or through third parties, the Kremlin must be convinced to abandon the path of war.

The horizon is soaked with smoke columns from artillery and rockets and slowly, slowly the invaders will conquer the entire Donbas. Then the new Tsar will propose a “pax russo” or recognition of victories, a request that will be rejected by Kyiv. And so, he will have the pretext to attack Odessa, his true ultimate goal.

Losing the only outlet to the sea would mean the strangulation of Ukraine. If Liz Truss, the new Iron Lady, becomes Prime Minister in London, the British fleet could defend Odessa and lead a coalition of hard and pure European countries like Poland, the Baltic countries and the Czech Republic, who would stand with the Ukrainians.

Officially, no NATO hat, but the risk of a total and devastating clash would be very high. This is the reason why we must talk about the war before the vote and especially find a way to peace at any cost, concludes Fausto Biloslavo.