• Learning From History: How to Avoid World War III
• Indo-Pakistani Conflict: Nuclear-Armed Neighbors Pull Back After International Mediation

By Shashi P.B.B. Malla

Avoid WW III

Last Thursday was the 80^th anniversary of the end of the Second World War.

In an op-ed in The New York Times, the foreign ministers of the Baltic States and some East European countries (including Ukraine) – most affected by the War – maintain that the legacy of the war that ended 80 years ago is critical for understanding how to restore and maintain long-term peace and security in Europe today (NYT, May 10-11).

Unfortunately, Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine has shattered the post-World War II security architecture and the international system based on the United Nations.

The foreign ministers of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Czech Republic, Moldova, Poland and Ukraine write that the conclusion of the Ukraine War would provide the foundation for a new security architecture for Europe.

They offer the lessons from World War II that must be taken into account if we want to create an enduring peace in Ukraine, rather than a pause before the next potentially disastrous  

The Basic Lessons:

1. Appeasing the Aggressor Leads to More Aggression, Not Peace

Making concessions on unlawful territorial claims are a disastrous mistake.

The partition of Czechoslovakia in 1938 only fueled Nazi Germany’s appetite and resulted in a global war.

Learning from this lesson, Ukraine will never accept the legitimization of Russia’s occupation and annexation of any part of Ukraine’s sovereign territory.

Respect for territorial integrity is a fundamental principle of international law.

There will be no sustainable peace and security at the cost of Ukraine’s people, independence, sovereignty or territorial integrity.

• Spheres of Influence Never Bring Peace & Stability. They Bring Oppression

World War II began when Nazi Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, one week after the signing of the Soviet-German Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and secret protocols to it, agreeing to partition Poland, the Baltic States and the rest of Europe.

Similarly, the Allied victors – the United States, the Soviet Union and the U.K. – sought to establish and consolidate their spheres of influence at a meeting in the Crimean city of Yalta in 1945.

However, the cessation of gunfire in Europe on May 8, 1945, did not bring freedom to many European nations.

They remained under Soviet occupation and control and suffered decades of international crimes, oppression and lack of freedom.

For these Baltic and East European states and people, the nightmare ended only five decades later with the collapse of the Soviet Empire and the re-establishment of their national sovereignty and independence from 1989 to 1991.

Today, Putin fantasizes about the re-establishment of the Soviet realm, where he can draw borders on Europe’s map, once again undermining international law and the right of nations in Russia’s neighborhood to make their own choices and decisions.

The Baltic States and the East European countries are determined never to allow this to happen.

Their principled position is that no third country has veto power over the choice of economic/political/security unions and alliances of Ukraine or any other nation.

Ukraine has already made its choice – the choice of the European Union (EU) and NATO – and it is not for the Kremlin to scrutinize this.

• A Lack of Accountability Breeds Future Atrocities

Nazi crimes were widely exposed, condemned, investigated and prosecuted, unlike Soviet ones.

According to the Baltic and East European foreign ministers, it’s very important that both totalitarian ideologies – Nazism and Soviet Totalitarianism – receive proper evaluationin Europe.

More light must be shed on crimes by the Soviet regime, including the deportations and executions of political prisoners.

Soviet crimes must be properly condemned, including those committed during the Soviet occupation of Europe after World War II.

This also highlights the importance of the accountability for Russia’s current crimes, including after the future fall of Putin’s regime.

• Historical Manipulation Must Be Corrected

As Russia continues its war against Ukraine and intensifies its hostile actions toward democratic European countries, the need to promote shared European remembrance narratives across the continent and beyond is more pressing than ever.

“A truthful assessment and profound understanding of history form the foundation of a society’s democratic resilience” (NYT).

The Baltic and East European countries stand ready to counter Russian disinformation activities and Russia’s attempts to rewrite European history.

They insist that Russia has no right to monopolize the victory over Nazism, which was accomplished by multiple nations and peoples.

Even the Red Army was multinational, with at least six million Ukrainians fighting in its ranks.

Instead of commemorating World War II victims, Putin’s regime has crafted an ugly cult of victory, utilizing the collective victory over the Nazis to justify its current atrocities against Ukrainians [ It is unbelievable that Putin calls Zelensky a Nazi! ].

The May 9 parade in Moscow, in which Russia annually marks the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany, is designed as the glorification of this cult.

Putin used it to rally more Russians to the front lines, solidify his regime and create an impression that his international isolation is fading.

• “Freedom Must Be Armed Better Than Tyranny” – Volodymyr Zelensky

Si vis pacem, para bellum

[If you want peace, prepare for war]

• Vegetius, 379-95 A.D., Roman military writer

Ukraine will never accept any restrictions on its armed forces, defence capabilities or defence assistance.

Instead, Ukraine is working to expand defence-industrial output and achieve defence self-sufficiency.

Sum Total

The foreign ministers maintain that learning these simple but important lessons of World War II is critical both to prevent the outbreak of another devastating global war and to reinvent a fair international system with real security guarantees for peaceful democratic states that offers accountability for aggressors and deterrence of them.

They are resolved to avoid repeating the mistakes that led to the Second World War and the subsequent Yalta system.

They are now confident that they can defend their principles and secure a free, united and secure Europe (NYT).

Indo-Pakistani Clash: Back From the Brink

Nuclear armed neighbors India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire last Saturday after international pressure and diplomacy, announcing a sudden stop to a conflict that had seemed to be alarmingly spiraling out of control (Reuters, May 10).

The fighting had been the worst between the old South Asian antagonists in nearly three decades and threatened to erupt into a full-scale war in one of the world’s most volatile and densely populated regions.

There were briefly fears that nuclear arsenals might come into play as Pakistan’s military said a top body overseeing its nuclear weapons would meet.

But the Pakistani defence minister said no such meeting was scheduled, hours after a night of heavy fighting in which the two countries targeted each other’s military bases and the combined civilian death toll rose to 66.

“Pakistan and India have agreed to a ceasefire with immediate effect,” Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar posted on X.

“Pakistan has always strived for peace and security in the region, without compromising on its sovereignty and territorial integrity!”

Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said the two countries’ military chiefs had spoken to each other and agreed that all fighting would stop at 5 pm Indian time (11.30 GMT), without using the word “ceasefire”.

They would speak to each other again on May 12.

Hotlines & Diplomacy

Dar told the broadcaster Geo News that military channels and hotlines between India and Pakistan had been activated, and three dozen countries had helped to facilitate the agreement.

On Wednesday, India had attacked what it said was “terrorist infrastructure” in Pakistani Kashmir and Pakistan proper, two weeks after 26 Hindu tourists (including one Nepali) were brutally killed in an attack at Pahalgam in Indian Kashmir.

Pakistan denied India’s accusations that it was involved in the attack.

Days of cross-border fire, shelling and drone and missile attacks followed.

Despite the temporary truce, two Indian government sources told Reuters that the punitive measures announced by India and reciprocated by Pakistan, such as trade suspension and visa cancellations, would remain in place for now.

The sources also said the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, a critical water-sharing pact that India suspended after the Pahalgam attack, would remain in abeyance.

Talks to follow at neutral venue

In a post on X, the U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio commended Narendra Modi and Sharif on the agreement, which he said included not only an immediate ceasefire but also the start of talks on “a broad set of issues at a neutral site”.

Shuja Nawaz, distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center, said the Indus treaty would figure prominently in the impending talks “after a decent interval, which allows both governments to claim credit for what they’ve achieved until now.”

Historical Dimension of the Conflict

India and Pakistan have been locked in a dispute over Kashmir ever since they were born at the end of British colonial rule in 1947.

Hindu-majority India and Muslim Pakistan both rule part of Kashmir but claim it in full.

[In addition, a sizable section, the Aksai Chin plateau in Ladakh has been annexed by China, and a small portion ceded by Pakistan to China].

They have gone to war three times, twice over Kashmir and once over the founding of Bangladesh, alongside numerous smaller outbreaks of fighting.

India blames Pakistan for an insurgency in its part of Kashmir that began in 1989 and has killed tens of thousands.

It also blames Pakistani Islamist militant groups for attacks elsewhere in India.

Pakistan rejects both charges.

It says it only provides moral, political and diplomatic support to Kashmiri separatists.

At the same time, India also provides clandestine support to Pakistani separatists in the province of Balochistan.

The only way to achieve permanent peace

As things now stand, the only way to permanent peace in South Asia is that the two neighbors legally recognize the de facto Line of Control between the two parts of Kashmir as the de jure international border.

The two countries must also solemnly undertake not to interfere in each other’s domestic affairs.

Since the old status quo cannot be changed either by outright war, or clandestine and opaque methods, including using separatists, the only way out of the morass is the establishment of a new status quo through peaceful means.

The writer can be reached at:

shashipbmalla@hotmail.com