RUS-UKRAIN Iron Curtain-Dr Shamsi - Article thematic Image (2)

The title is inspired by the phrase coined by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and quoted by Ambassador Riaz Khokhar at a seminar on the Ukraine war organised by the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS) on July 6, 2022.

The war in Europe between Russia and Ukraine has entered its fifth month since a full-scale offensive was launched by Russian land forces on February 24, 2022. Like so many wars, which begin as a result of miscalculation, or the exuberance of leadership without due consideration, this war is no different. Neither in its nature nor its character. It is intense, destructive, and without a visible end.

Without going into the background of the Russia-Ukraine war, because a lot has already been written on the subject since its beginning, this article is aimed at suggesting a way forward to initiate processes that may increase the probabilities of its logical culmination.

At the outset, Russia must announce a ceasefire on all fronts to reduce further destruction and loss of lives on both sides, particularly Ukrainians. Concurrently, NATO must stop its military consignments to Ukraine that is fuelling the fire in this unnecessary war. In fact, most wars are unnecessary, but this one was absolutely unwarranted.

The world has, at large, still not recovered from the ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic, and most developing countries are still grappling with supply chain disruptions with regard to energy and food consignments. At this stage, two of the world’s largest energy and food suppliers, Russia and Ukraine, are engaged in a devastating war which has, in fact, adversely impacted all the energy and food importing states. Not only have the prices of energy and food commodities skyrocketed, but availability is also getting questionable for cash-starved countries. Sri Lanka is just one such state, whereas Pakistan is also not far from hitting that road.

At the recent CASS seminar, Ambassador Riaz Khokhar raised a very pertinent question of whether Russia would ever vacate the captured areas in the Donbas and Luhansk regions since they are inhabited by ethnic Russians. It is in this context that an “iron curtain” may return to Europe between Russia and Ukraine.

However, this author is of the view that the Cold War’s iron curtain ensured that the two superpowers did not fight directly with each other, primarily due to the establishment of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). Whereas, the “new iron curtain,” if it gets drawn in the eastern half of the vast territory of Ukraine, may not be able to guarantee any war between Russia and NATO in the future. Therefore, US-led NATO must assure Russia that Ukraine would not be made part of NATO under any circumstances, even if Ukraine becomes a part of the European Union, as suggested by Ambassador Khokhar, and gets a Marshall Plan for its reconstruction.

For the same purpose, it is incumbent upon US-led NATO to withdraw all its defensive but highly sophisticated weapon systems provided to Ukraine to defend itself against the Russian offensive.

On part of Russia, Putin must remain cautious of mission creep and must not violate Chinese sage Sun Tzu’s landmark dictum that protracted wars are counterproductive for the offensive elements. Russia may have achieved its politico-military objectives partially and may be willing to continue its war for another two months to slice as much Ukrainian territory as possible. However, it would soon realise that going into the Ukrainian heartland beyond the areas inhabited by ethnic Russians would become improbable to hold without serious repercussions. Putin must not ignore deep socio-cultural and family ties with the Ukrainians, and therefore, must bring this war to an end as soon as its security parameters are achieved.

Wars do not resolve disputes permanently but rather sow the seeds for the next war. Recounting Sun Tzu’s precepts that a stronger power must aim to win the war without fighting, or at best win the war in the minimum possible time, protracted wars would always favour the defender because it would find many sympathisers and supporters to defend its territory. Moreover, the people would soon get alienated from offensive forces and take up arms to engage the enemy alongside their regular forces, which could be extremely harmful to the occupying forces.

Dr Zia Ul Haque Shamsi is the author of ‘Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan’ and ‘South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace.’ He is presently working as Director (Peace and Conflict Studies) at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. The article was first published in Daily Times. He can be reached at [email protected]

Image Credit: Online Sources


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »