Alliances are made to serve the purpose of creating a bridge between warring nations or to extend support to allies to prevent wars. When these alliances end up creating a trust deficit, rethinking is required. The serious question that arises is can Russia’s war against Ukraine turn into a global war?

Unless there is an early diplomatic breakthrough, the conflict between Russia and the West is likely to sharpen in the coming days. The objection of Russian President Vladimir Putin to the enlargement of Nato is natural, as he considers it to be a threat to his country. He thus firmly demands that Ukraine never be inducted into the military alliance. Even the ludicrous nature of the appeal should have posed an alarm, knowing that Russia has the potential to back it up with preposterous follow-up action. It should have been assumed by Nato that the situation demanded tact and diplomacy instead of further provocation.

Unless unconcerned about the consequences, no person or organisation in power should callously ignore a threatening situation that involves a nuclear superpower. In this case, the US and Europe acted as the provocateurs, when they could have easily been the mediators to build a bridge between the parties in question. This conflict expanded significantly when Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February. This open military invasion of Ukraine is the largest military attack since World War II. The operation entailed missiles and airstrikes throughout Ukraine ~ including the capital of Kyiv.

Thousands have been killed and over two million Ukrainians have fled the country in the first major humanitarian crisis in Europe since the Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s. The international community widely condemned this invasion, followed by many countries implementing economic sanctions on Russia. The United Nations initiated a resolution by demanding a full withdrawal. The whole world has been witnessing this madness, yet no one succeeded in achieving even a slightly agreeable outcome or resolution.

Homes could be seen ablaze in satellite images of regions around Kyiv. The attacks have destroyed airports and other infrastructure. Ukrainian forces have been retaliating by killing many Russian soldiers, though the capital remains under heavy bombardment. In addition to fighting the Russian invasion, civilians are also facing violent confrontations among themselves for basic supplies. Europe has donated millions worth of arms and other aid to the Ukrainian military.

The UK is the largest bilateral donor to Ukraine in aid. In addition, the US, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Spain, and the Netherlands have donated arms to Ukraine. Businesses have shut down in Russia and Ukraine. The US announced a ban on imports of Russian oil. The economic loss is no doubt disastrous, but the loss of lives is irreplaceable. The resources and precious human lives lost during the war cannot be replenished. Moscow, however, sees America and Europe as major parties in its war given the military assistance. They have armed the resistance and imposed unprecedented sanctions on Russia.

It seems that since 1945 nothing has changed. The public still has no say when it comes to warfare. World leaders continue to exploit their positions of authority with negligible consideration for consequences and prioritize only political and strategic benefit. What use is social media and freedom of speech when it holds no value pertaining to saving human lives? What good is an educated and cultured society when it is not being put to use? The actions of all concerned may have entailed varied rationale, but regrettably no one is interested in resolving the conflict.

It takes two hands to clap, so each party is responsible for this state of affairs. Russia could have recognized where Ukraine’s aspiration to ally with NATO came from. The subtle encroachment and build-up of Russian forces on the borders were bound to alarm Ukraine and spark retaliation. Ukraine on the other hand may find it challenging to survive without Russia in the long term. Complete severing of ties will no doubt be a blow to Russia, but it will be catastrophic for Ukraine.

The role of Ukraine’s President was crucial and while it is brave to strike back, it may have not been the wisest course of action to ensure his people’s safety. He could have considered his options and opted for the least damaging way out for both countries. The extensive support to Ukraine by the US and Europe over years could not have been just out of concern for its well-being or plain charity.

If history has taught us anything, it’s that these countries do not indulge any nation without anticipating benefits. If they are genuinely against violence, the US and European countries must use their influence to create a bridge between Russia and Ukraine, addressing Russia’s insecurity. Instead, they are provoking and supporting the war.

When your neighbor’s house catches fire, your first thought is to get the fire under control and get people out of danger. Can you imagine adding fuel to the fire instead? Unfortunately, this seems to be the situation with countries supporting Ukraine against Russia. Instead of trying to act as mediators between the two, USA and Europe have managed to augment the destruction with their supply of ammunition.

Rather than picking sides, they should have focused on persuading both sides, along with alleviating their concerns. If Ukraine and Russia were unable to resolve their issues and achieve common ground, it was the responsibility of US and Europe to bridge this gap and halt the senseless killing, instead of themselves supporting the war. Europe and the US have become an integral part of this war and cannot shrug off responsibility. By supporting one country, they are also party to this lunacy and killing.

Resolving the issue and finding a diplomatic solution should have been their top priority. Instead of defusing the situation, they ended up extending the war by enabling it. Their unabridged participation in the war takes away their right to claim moral high ground. This is exactly what went wrong in Afghanistan when the United States only exploited Nato’s military power instead of monopolizing its political influence. Being insecure and destructive is not the answer. Finding a win-win resolution agreeable to both the nations involved ensures the least damage and maximum balance and peace.

It does not matter which country loses and which wins. Either outcome is going to cost the lives of innocent civilians. Picking a side is not a solution. Ironing out differences and finding middle ground is the way to maintain decorum and restore peace. The clear reason behind this war is mistrust of Russia in Nato. The economic sanctions are not affecting Vladimir Putin; they are affecting the common public.

The entire economic climate of the world is impacted, and millions are losing their source of livelihood if not their lives. If Nato cannot take ownership of this massive devastation, they have no right to claim that they are helping someone. Their actions have only made matters worse by aggravating the situation. Has anyone ever questioned the US and Europe why Nato has never exercised its political influence and only focused on using its military power? This makes one wonder if the organisation has ever managed to achieve any outcome other than destruction. Is ending a civilization the only solution the US can concoct?

In that case, Nato is dangerous and must be dismantled immediately. There must be a way for countries not to be pressured into waging war. They should not be made to believe that fighting is their only option. Nato forced Putin to choose to align with China and confront the US and Europe with an impossible set of demands including a sphere of influence in Europe.

The only way to avoid war is to create a bridge of trust. No matter who wins and who loses, there will be loss of lives and destruction of property. A win-lose situation will not help. Only a win-win agreement can ensure that both counties come out of this situation with their population and infrastructure intact. This may not be easy, but it is the only humane way to handle it. In the end, the true sufferers are those who lost their lives, their families, their homes, people who fled, and those who are still fighting.

People all over the world will suffer the economic consequences of this war. Job losses, sinking GDP, struggling refugees are just some of the after-effects of war. Life once lost, cannot be returned. Families once broken, cannot be restored. If an alliance cannot serve its purpose, it should be dissolved.

Finally, there are two ways to deal with such situations. One is to give in to anger and seek revenge. The other is the path of reason, aiming to dissipate turmoil and mistrust. When others try to harm us, it is futile to try and control their actions. Instead, we need to learn to calm ourselves and do what we can to resolve the situation peacefully. We need to learn to dissociate from the pain to reach a state where we harbour no feelings of hurt or vengeance and focus only on saving innocent lives. How can we attain this state?

It happens when we recognize that we are all meant to be part of the same divinity. Europe, the US, Ukraine and Russia have blood on their hands for killing innocent people including children. They owe an answer to humanity.

(The writer is Chair, Environment Committee, PHD Chambers of Commerce & Industry, New Delhi)