Ukraine Aftermath: Reflections on Moving Forward
By Tom Rakusan, Contributing Author/ October 17, 2022
Mr. Rakusan recently retired from the Federal Government after 39 years with various elements of the U.S. national security community. Mr. Rakusan’s focus has been on Eastern and Western Europe, the former Soviet states, and across the Middle East. He has served in a multitude of locations in these regions, as well as in Washington, working these issues in the national security community within various national security settings over several Administrations.
Mr. Rakusan has also led several large organizations. In these and other senior national security leadership positions, Mr. Rakusan led innovation and created multi-disciplinary teams to tackle the Nation’s most pressing national security challenges.
Mr. Rakusan is currently employed with a U.S. private equity firm, focusing on investments in companies developing tools needed by the U.S. national security community.
Incremental Progress
The recent victories by Ukrainian forces are notable. Their progress in pushing back on the Russian presence in Ukraine needs to be praised. Ukrainian courage is amazing. Russian incompetence, corruption, and failure of any sort of leadership will be remembered for a few generations. The war will go on. The Russians will make some incremental progress. The Ukrainians will as well. The war of attrition will last a while.
On balance, Ukraine will win.
Not taking this victory for granted and keeping a check on wishful thinking, I believe we need to focus now on the aftermath of this conflict.
The Settlement
Ukraine should not negotiate for its territory, for its dead children, for its destroyed infrastructure. The Russians have committed too many atrocities: they have killed too many young human beings, too many Ukrainians of all ages. The Russians have destroyed too much valuable infrastructure, all through a war conducted by terror.
President Zelenskyy is correct in not being willing to negotiate a settlement with Russia. Any settlement will be a defeat.
That means the war of attrition will continue for some time. If the West remains unified and stands up against Russian terrorism on this wide-ranging scale, Ukraine will prevail.
Part of the “settlement” of the war or the post-war future will be Russia’s political landscape. It is quite possible this war will be Putin’s downfall. But if Putin goes, who replaces him?
It could get worse. We could see more Russian nationalist fervor in the aftermath of an embarrassing defeat. Or will the Russian people, perhaps by then increasingly tired of Putin’s failures, be more willing to re-engage with the outside world?
Would a power shift in Russia then result in someone like a Sobyanin or a Navalny?
Then What?
The rebuilding must begin. Ukraine’s reconstruction will take many forms. The easiest, by far, will be the reconstruction of the physical infrastructure. The damage to human beings, the dead, the emotional trauma caused by Russian citizens against the families of Ukraine will take generations to heal.
The West must begin to draft a specific plan to rebuild Ukraine. The physical part, and be prepared to assist with supporting the long-term recovery of the emotional trauma caused by the Kremlin, Putin’s inner circle, criminal co-conspirators, and his citizens.
NATO and More
It is up to the United States, NATO countries, the European Union, and others not in these alliances to enable Ukraine to become a key member of the international community in order to avoid and reject further/future Russian aggression.
A few ideas come to mind, aside from the likely creation of a 21st century Marshall Plan or something similar, already under discussion in Western and other responsible capitals.
We must also remember that within the context of the crisis in Ukraine, there are still Ukrainian politics and rivalries. Former President Poroshenko has been involved in the war effort, mostly to contribute to Ukraine’s future, but also to maintain his political momentum. Zelenskyy has proven to be an incredible wartime leader, but politics will reassert themselves.
Zelenskyy will have enormous political capital in immediate aftermath, yet others will try to lay a claim to their respective political futures. Much will be up for debate after the war, including the reconstruction, Ukraine’s future standing in the international community, and internal political divides over new social structures.
Georgia, Moldova, and Other Locations of Russian Crimes
Another idea that comes to mind in the context of rebuilding Ukraine and the post-war new status quo in the former USSR is the issue of Georgia, and even Moldova.
The Russians have invaded Georgia twice and still hold occupied territories to this day in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia, noted as similar to the land grab in the Donbas, Crimea, and elsewhere in Ukraine. The Russians still maintain their military presence in Transnistria. What if the West encouraged Georgia and Moldova to offer assistance to Ukraine, within their admittedly limited capabilities, and then included Georgia and Moldova and their lost territories in the effort to oust Russia not only from Ukraine, but also from Georgia and Moldova?
I would argue that Georgia and Moldova and their occupied territories should be on the table as the West and its allies–and Ukraine– strive for Russian withdrawals, not only from Ukraine but also from Georgia and Moldova. The time will be right as the Russians are down.
And what is the difference between the land Putin stole in Moldova and Georgia from the land he stole in Ukraine?
Russians Refugees and Draft Avoiders
Hundreds of thousands of Russians have left Russia recently to avoid being drafted by Putin’s incompetent military “structures.” These people are located in Europe, Central Asia, Mongolia, and other locations which would accept them, and where they could still travel.
Many left because they had finally had it with Putin.
Many others left to simply avoid being drafted. It is hard to estimate how many left because of deep personal convictions that Putin, his regime, and the war in Ukraine is wrong.
And, how many left simply to avoid being drawn into the war?
Civilian Conservation Corps as a Model to Consider
One possible idea would be to create a coalition of countries with Russian dissidents and draft avoiders, where each government would create something akin to the American Civilian Conservation corps of FDR’s New Deal, but made up of these recently arrived Russians.
I am not arguing for internment camps or forced labor, the way Stalin used German prisoners of war to rebuild the Soviet Union after World War II.
I am thinking of a volunteer labor force, which would be compensated by countries willing to help Ukraine post-conflict. These Russians would rebuild Ukraine at fair wages.
This way, they would be put to work, and they would also contribute to the rebuilding of schools, hospitals and public infrastructure which their country destroyed. Those who would agree to contribute their efforts would gain much respect among the decent people of the International community. Those who would reject this offer would be seen for what they are.
Yes, There are Downsides
On the practical side, many of the Russians who left would make poor construction workers. On the political side, it is hard to imagine the Ukrainians would want large numbers of Russians coming in for fear the Russians would not leave.
In the 1970s, Brezhnev sent Russian speakers to Latvia and Estonia, and they never left. Instead, perhaps we should send them back to Russia. Those Polish workers who worked in the West in the 1990s took home new ideas.
Having lived in the West, maybe they can carry back some fresh thinking.