When Donald Trump said that Russia had been “fine on Ukraine” and had not been doing much, I wondered what would have to happen for him to judge otherwise. Russia continues to occupy Ukrainian territory and attack Ukrainian towns and cities. For the people living with the consequences, this is hardly a period of reassuring restraint.
On 30 October, at the G20 foreign ministers’ meeting in Atlanta, Ed Miliband offered a rather different assessment. Addressing Sergei Lavrov directly, he identified Russia as the aggressor, reminded him of the people killed at Dnipro railway station the previous day and challenged him to tell Putin that Russia would not win the war. I was glad to hear Britain’s Foreign Secretary speak plainly; I would have wanted the same clarity from whoever held the office.
There are reasonable questions to ask about what such an intervention achieves. Lavrov is unlikely to return to Moscow chastened by a rebuke from a British minister. Public exchanges can become performances for domestic audiences, while the difficult business of diplomacy happens elsewhere. A forceful speech does not protect a power station, supply an air defence system or bring a bereaved family any comfort.
But the language governments use still matters. It tells allies whether they can depend on us, gives adversaries an indication of our resolve and helps establish what we are prepared to accept. When an American President appears to minimise Russia’s conduct, that carries consequences far beyond the immediate exchange with a reporter. It risks suggesting that continued aggression has become tolerable, provided it does not inconvenience the rest of us too much.
I have spent much of my working life involved in international cooperation, particularly through Scouting and youth work. I believe in bringing people together across borders, including people whose governments disagree profoundly. Those encounters have taught me to be wary of easy national stereotypes and of assuming that any country’s people can be reduced to the behaviour of its leaders. They have also reinforced my belief that cooperation needs some dependable rules.
One of those rules must be that a powerful country cannot acquire the right to its neighbour’s territory simply by sending an army across the border. If we allow that principle to weaken, the consequences extend well beyond Europe. Smaller countries everywhere have an interest in a world where sovereignty means more than whatever their strongest neighbour chooses to permit.
That does not remove the need for negotiation. Wars end through decisions and agreements, and diplomacy will require conversations with people responsible for appalling acts. I would welcome serious efforts to secure a just and lasting peace. But any settlement must give proper weight to Ukraine’s security and to the wishes of Ukrainians themselves. Their country is not ours to bargain away.
Nor do I think Britain should congratulate itself too readily. Our history gives us ample reason for humility, and our application of international principles has often been inconsistent. We should expect to be challenged about that inconsistency and be willing to examine it. The obligation to do better remains, even when we have failed to meet it before.
I would also avoid confident predictions about how or when this war will end. Miliband’s insistence that Russia will not win expresses a determination that needs to be sustained through practical support. It should not become a comforting phrase that allows us to stop thinking about the costs, choices and commitments involved.
My judgement is that Britain is right to stand with Ukraine. That means supporting its ability to defend itself, backing credible diplomacy and continuing to name the aggression for what it is. Miliband’s intervention was welcome because it made that position clear, directly to the minister representing the government responsible. The work of making good on it continues long after the speech.
Featured photograph: Ukrainian flag near Kyiv City Council, 22 January 2008. Photograph by UAWeBeR / Wikimedia Commons, used under CC BY 3.0. Displayed with a cropped preview.
