War as an Extension of Politics: Analyzing Modern Conflicts

In today's world, where the threat of global war is becoming more realistic, it is essential to understand that war is not always an effective means of achieving political objectives. Valeriy Pekar, an entrepreneur and lecturer at the Kyiv-Mohyla Business School, points out that two significant wars that have occurred in recent decades illustrate that even the most powerful states cannot impose their will through military actions.

At the onset of the full-scale war between Russia and Ukraine, many mocked the shortcomings of the Russian military machine. However, looking at the situation objectively reveals that at the beginning of the conflict, Russia had a considerable military advantage. Despite this, after four years of war, it has failed to achieve any strategic goals. The Kremlin's primary objective remained the deprivation of Ukraine's sovereignty through imposed restrictions and the establishment of a puppet government, but these plans have not materialized.

A similar situation can be observed in Iran, where the American military machine, the strongest in the world, has also failed to achieve its strategic goals. Despite numerous military operations, the United States has been unable to change the regime in Iran to one that could be negotiated with. The assassinations of high-ranking officials have led to power shifting to even less negotiable groups. Moreover, the promised attacks on civilian infrastructure could place the United States on the same level as Russia, stripping them of support from allies both externally and within Iran.

Interestingly, despite all of Ukraine's efforts to damage the Russian economy, this will not lead to a change in Russian policy. The war may only end as a result of profound political changes, such as the disintegration of Russia into new independent states, but this cannot be achieved through military means.

In this context, Taiwan may feel more secure than before, provided it actively prepares for defense. Beijing is not interested in a bombed territory; they need a high-tech Taiwan to possess it. The arms race that has begun globally may lead to wars becoming rare, as potential aggressors will recognize the high costs of war and the low prospects of achieving their strategic goals.

However, victims may be those who choose the path of pacifism and do not prepare for war, remaining defenseless. This is a clear example of the principle 'if you want peace, prepare for war.' In Ukraine, even in the 15th year of confrontation, there are those who do not understand this principle. The best example for us may be Switzerland, which is always ready for total defense.

Nevertheless, the confrontation between states is not going anywhere. This means that war increasingly shifts into the cognitive sphere, where the battlefield becomes the consciousness of people. Unfortunately, today very few countries are actively working in this domain, and our enemy is one of the strongest and most experienced in this field. For now, we are saved by their traditional incompetence rather than our ability to defend ourselves or strike back.

Yuriy Fedorenko, in his reflections, notes that Russia could have achieved much more without war in 2014 by using its money, culture, and agents to influence Ukraine. Look at Georgia: Russia captured two small Georgian autonomies by military means but was able to influence the entire country through non-military means. Belarus also fell under Moscow's control without war.

If consciousness becomes the battlefield, we must learn to defend and advance in this sphere. We need to study our vulnerabilities and eliminate them. Countering disinformation is a crucial aspect, as falsehoods can circle the globe while the truth is still getting dressed.

As Clausewitz noted, war is an extension of politics by other means. Today, politics is becoming an extension of war by other means, and the Nobel Peace Prize is not awarded for stopping such wars.