The wind can blow in any direction, and no one can forever remain in a position of power. The mighty powers have perished, and new powers have become mighty. This is the law of nature and a process that can be stopped by no one. From the UN to advanced nuclear armaments, to alliances like NATO, none could succeed in stopping a war when it broke out. The United States of America continues to be the biggest supplier of arms and yet claims to support peace. Being the facilitator of a key ingredient necessary for war, i.e., weapons, it needs to be clear if its motive is to stop war or encourage destruction. Who will be the biggest loser here, and who stands to gain the most in the Ukraine-Russia war? While it may not be a mystery, it is time to spell it out and examine the motives, intentions, losses, and gains of all the parties involved.

The biggest loser is Ukraine, without a doubt. The next affected is Europe. Russia is a close third. The countries that will end up gaining the most benefit both economically and strategically are the United States, China, and potentially India. Ukraine’s President pursued this war knowing very well that his country was up against a nu clear power. Being neighbours, the countries cannot possibly afford to be unfriendly, but the situation is worse for Ukraine, while Russia still has China to rely on.

A reasonable explanation for this terrible misjudgment could be that Ukraine was tricked into this conflict by Europe and the US because NATO wanted to increase its sphere of influence up to the doorstep of Russia. The idea of joining the US-led NATO, a direct adversary to Russia, would have tempted Ukraine, and it would have counted on the US to join the conflict and force Russia to retreat. Unfortunately, this was an open declaration of going against Russia.

No superpower will tolerate such an alliance by its neighbouring country, especially when NATO was already advancing towards Russia. The US was expecting a war, and so was Ukraine. The difference is that the US was not going to bear its direct brunt; Ukraine was, so it was its leader’s responsibility to have thought his actions thro ugh. Being supported by NATO blinded Ukraine as it failed to realize how, being a sandwiched country, it could not win a war against Russia. A wise leader should have made a compromise and chosen to be neutral with Russia. Ukraine should have anticipated the outcome before flaunting its bravery and agitating Vladimir Putin, without being selfsufficient and ultimately relying on Europe, begging for money, arms, and other aid.

Ultimately, it was Ukraine that suffered maximum devastation in terms of manpower, infrastructure, and resources, and it will take much longer for the country to bounce back, if it even can. Coming to Europe, countries in the continent probably thought they had nothing to lose and tried to increase their influence with the support of the US. What they did not realize is that they cannot disconnect completely from Russia, as Russia is a resource power. In the at tempt to cripple Russia by placing punitive sanctions, the entire economy of Europe lies shattered.

Russia has found alternative buyers. They have buyers in China and India, who need fuel. The war has also had a considerable economic impact on Russia, wherein the rouble has dropped in value and inflation has soared. Moscow’s stock exch ange has closed, and many international brands have left the country. Russia has been weakened and isolated, with its economy shrinking, and it has to depend significantly on China. Now, how is the United Sta tes the winner here? The country is clearly indulging in monkey justice, and the two main advantages that are apparent in this situation are: firstly, it will be able to sell its oil unhindered and make money, and secondly, Europe has no option but to buy a lot of armaments from the U.S. to protect itself from Russia. So, they end up getting maximum economic benefit.

However, this must not be all. There is more to this game than meets the eye. China stands to gain hands down because Ru ssia is now dep endent on it for all its needs. China will clearly benefit economically. India has al ready gained an advantage from the sanctions by getting cheaper oil and will continue to benefit similarly as more sanctions come into play. Strategically, the United States can never put sanctions on China as they are dependent on them for all supplies. All their infrastructure and manufacturing facilities are in China. Shifting the entire operation overnight is impossible; hence the U.S. can never threaten China.

The entire Russian mar ket has very strategically been waiting for this opportunity and will join China closely. Even strategically, it was foolish of Ukraine to act the way it did. Russia started striking only after giving ample warnings to Europe and Ukraine, which were ignored, in addition to using unparliamentary language against Putin, thus provoking him further. For the momentary satisfaction of being seen as a hero who is not afraid to go against Russia, Ukraine’s President put his people in the middle of an unnecessary conflict.

He should have respected his limitations and not pushed his luck by hoping to win a war against the world’s biggest nuclear power, which also happens to be a neighbour. One can only go so far with borrowed resources and aid. Ukraine’s president should not have let his ego get the better of him and rely too much on external support. It would have been wise for Ukraine to make peace with Russia rather than trusting the US and Europe, who have never in the history of mankind been known for being generous without a motive. Donald Trump’s declaration that he would end the Ukraine-Russia war if elected has ignited a God-sent opportunity for Ukraine to rebuild the country.

Russia may not retreat from the areas it occupies, but with the offer of a security guarantee needed by Russia from Ukraine and the building of trust, there is a good possibility for Russia to negotiate peace with Ukraine. This is not just a war for land, as both countries have very large territories. Ukraine would have to realize that taking care of the security interests of Russia, not NATO, is essential to build trust and potentially regain their occupied land

(The writer is Chair, Environment & Green Hydrogen Committee, PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and former Chairman, EAC (Industry-2), Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change. He can be reached at jpglobalconsultinggroup@gmail.com)