-Analysis-
PARIS — As we approach the second anniversary of the war in Ukraine, the conflict seems to enter a new phase, characterized by a double escalation of both bombing and rhetoric.
Faced with increasing Russian attacks on its town and civilian infrastructures, Ukraine no longer holds back from striking Russian cities. A perfect disaster scenario is unfolding, with the risk growing that the conflict spreads territorially.
[shortcode-Subscribe-to-Ukraine-daily-box]
What if the war in Ukraine is to the 21st century what the Spanish Civil War was to the 20th : a final warning, before the fall into the abyss?
Certainly, at first glance, everything seems to distinguish the two wars from each other — to the point that the comparison may seem perfectly artificial and unnecessarily anxiety-inducing. And yet…
At its starting point, the Spanish war was a civil war between a Republican regime and rebel military forces, embodying the ultraconservative ideas challenging the left-wing ideologies of the regime in power.
The war in Ukraine cannot be seen as a civil war, even if Moscow claims to deny the existence of a national Ukrainian identity. The Spanish Civil War saw the victory of General Franco’s rebel forces, who enjoyed the unfailing support of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy.
Whereas the Republicans, divided between communists and socialists, had been steadfastly supported only by the U.S.S.R. Democratic Europe proved to be far too feeble.
Factory of adventurism
Was it possible to join forces without hesitation with those who enjoyed the active support of the Bolsheviks? Today, maybe because it’s more afraid of Putin’s Russia than it was of “fascism” in the past, Europe is — so far at least — remarkably united behind Kyiv (with the notable exception of Hungary). And the United States is fully committed, which was clearly not the case in the 1930s.
In ideological terms, the Spanish Civil War was a mobilizer of energies and, even more so, emotions. International brigades were formed to defend the Republican cause. This has only been marginally true of the war in Ukraine.
What is at stake in Western Europe concerns the entire future of our planet.
And it’s been clear since October 7 that the new war in the Middle East is arousing more passions than the war in Ukraine. The Palestinians have become, over time and with increasing Israeli bombing of Gaza — especially for younger generations — the equivalent of what the Vietnamese were in the late 1960s.
For our globalized world, the war in Ukraine is a conflict between two “white” nationalisms, which attracts too much Western attention. It is perceived not so much as the starting point of a tragic spiral for the world, but as a guilty distraction for a Western world which, far from accepting its relative marginalization, is demonstrating its ultimate narcissism.
Such a reading not only plays into Moscow’s hands, it is a serious misinterpretation. What is at stake in Western Europe concerns the entire future of our planet.
The war in Ukraine is probably of a completely different strategic importance from the new explosion of violence in the Middle East, whatever the risks of it spreading. Resigning ourselves to a Russian victory in Ukraine means accepting that force will prevail over law. It opens the door to all kinds of adventurism, on every continent from Europe to Asia, to the Middle East and even Latin America.
Putin is no Hitler, even if…
In strictly military terms, the war in Ukraine is reminiscent of the trenches of World War I. Maximum loss of life, minimum gain on the ground.
And one might even be (wrongly) tempted to perceive a hint of 1917 in the expression of the suffering felt and expressed by the Ukrainians. But in reality, from a global geopolitical point of view, the best time reference for understanding the war in Ukraine is the years preceding World War II.
Putin is not Hitler, even if Russia is becoming increasingly fascist under his leadership. The war in Ukraine is not the Spanish Civil War. But there is a real risk of a new Munich if, through fatigue, resignation or a profound lack of understanding of the current issues at stake, we allow ourselves to abandon Ukraine.
Are Europeans unconsciously preparing for Donald Trump’s eventual return to power in Washington, with all its consequences for the global balance of power? This scenario, while certainly possibly, is far from inevitable. Ten months is an eternity in politics.
And Europe, without America, has the means — if it wants to, of course — to continue supporting Ukraine. Serious studies are putting forward figures in hard euro cash. All it would take is for each European to agree to devote 70€ a year to helping Ukraine — a neglible sum for some, a considerable amount for others — and Europe could, on a strictly budgetary level of course, take the place of an America which, as in the aftermath of World War I, would have lapsed into isolationism.
Back to Munich ?
For Europe, the dilemma is clear: return to Munich or a decisive test of its will to exist autonomously. It’s a question of peace or war on our continent, and more generally of the evolution of the international system as a whole. Europe is certainly no longer the heart of the world, as it may have been at the time of the Spanish Civil War.
What is at stake is not just the cause of democracy.
But the war in Ukraine is one of those defining moments that History has repeatedly provided. It is, despite its many obvious differences, “our Spanish Civil War.” A final warning.
Let’s not be fooled by Putin’s boasting, or blinded by the sophisms, self-interested or otherwise, of those who claim that the conflict in Ukraine is “an American war” that cannot affect a Europe that must be neutral between Moscow and Washington.
What is at stake is not just the cause of democracy, but that of peace in the face of adventurism. As was the case in 1939, we must put a stop to it, before it’s too late.
