• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
{
  "authors": [
    "Dmitri Trenin"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Russia",
    "Eastern Europe",
    "Ukraine",
    "Western Europe",
    "Germany"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Global Governance"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

Europe’s Nightmare Could Still Come True: A NATO-Russia War Over Ukraine

The main players in the Ukrainian crisis must take urgent steps to avoid the danger of a big war.

Link Copied
By Dmitri Trenin
Published on Oct 7, 2014

Source: National Interest

Despite numerous violations, the cease-fire in Ukraine's Donbass region is largely holding. For very different reasons, President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine and President Vladimir Putin of Russia have come to lead the parties of peace in their respective capitals. Economic issues clearly top the agenda in both Ukraine and Russia.

Yet, the cease-fire remains very brittle. The Donetsk airport and the city of Donetsk itself have seen some heavy fighting, with many civilian casualties. The parties of war on both sides of the front line have not given up their ambitious goals. Should the cease-fire be allowed to break down completely, the danger of a big war in Ukraine will immediately reappear.

This scenario must be absolutely barred, as it risks escalation to a full-scale military confrontation between Russia and NATO. However, mere avoidance of war is not good enough. The perilous political dynamics in Eastern Europe need to be reversed. To do that, the following immediate steps are in order.

  1. Deploying OSCE military observers, in sufficient numbers and appropriately armed, along the lines of engagement in Donbass, starting with the Donetsk area, and along the Ukraine-Russia border adjacent to it;
     
  2. Reaching an agreement between Ukraine and Russia, with the European Union's active participation, on the gas price for Ukraine, and on the associated issues, such as a schedule for the gas debt repayment, which would allow Russian gas deliveries to Ukraine this coming winter;
     
  3. Starting a political dialogue, mediated by the OSCE, between the representatives of Ukraine and of the people of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions, with a view, initially, to restoring contacts and communication between them, and eventually to agreeing on a formula for reintegration.

Ironically, but also tragically, given the number of people killed and the extent of the damage sustained, the main players in the Ukraine crisis have already achieved their most important objectives and can now well agree on a new provisional status quo.

Ukraine is more of a nation today than it has ever been since gaining independence. Its westward orientation is not in question anymore, even if it will be a very long time before Ukraine can join the European Union.

Crimea is in Russia's hands, and the very fact of Ukraine's demand to return it will securely prevent Kiev from achieving NATO membership. Not so much the dispute over territory, but the real danger of a military conflict with Moscow will keep the United States and its allies (above all Germany) from accepting Ukraine as a formal ally.

The degree of national unity achieved within most of Ukraine since the beginning of the war in the east makes the Russian language issue less topical in Ukrainian politics. In the future, linguistic differences in Ukraine will not necessarily constitute a political divide. Political processes in Ukraine are also pointing toward the emergence of a pluralistic, less-centralized polity.

Thus, a Ukraine that is leaning toward the West, but staying formally neutral between NATO and Russia; widely populated with Russian speakers, but often critical about Moscow's policies; and decentralized without the danger of secession is emerging as a new state of balance. The conflict in Donbass will take a long time to resolve, but it will be peripheral to the fate of Ukraine as a whole. As for Crimea, international agreement on its status will take a very long time and will reflect the future status of Russia's relations with the West.

Meanwhile, Russia and the European Union have a good reason to cooperate on Ukraine, each driven by its own motives. Europe, reluctantly, will have to bail Ukraine out, but Ukraine's continuing access to the Russian market will help. Russia is also pouring money into Crimea, which it sees as a jewel in its crown, and will have, for now, to chip in for Donbass as well. A modicum of Euro-Russian cooperation on Ukraine will let the United States focus on the issues more relevant to its own security and economic opportunity. Almost seventy years after the end of World War II, the incredible sight of German soldiers keeping the peace between Ukrainians and Russians may usher in a kind of stability to Europe's east.

This article originally appeared in the National Interest.

About the Author

Dmitri Trenin

Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center

Trenin was director of the Carnegie Moscow Center from 2008 to early 2022.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Mapping Russia’s New Approach to the Post-Soviet Space

      Dmitri Trenin

  • Commentary
    What a Week of Talks Between Russia and the West Revealed

      Dmitri Trenin

Dmitri Trenin
Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
SecurityForeign PolicyGlobal GovernanceNorth AmericaUnited StatesRussiaEastern EuropeUkraineWestern EuropeGermany

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    The Greatest Dangers May Lie Ahead

    In an interview, Nicole Grajewski discusses the military dimension of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Firepower Against Willpower

    In an interview, Naysan Rafati assesses the first week that followed the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    What Is Israel’s Plan in Lebanon?

    At heart, to impose unconditional surrender on Hezbollah and uproot the party among its coreligionists.

      Yezid Sayigh

  • people watching smoke rising at sunrise from rooftops
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Bombing Campaigns Do Not Bring About Democracy. Nor Does Regime Change Without a Plan.

    Just look at Iraq in 1991.

      Marwan Muasher

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Axis of Resistance or Suicide?

    As Iran defends its interests in the region and its regime’s survival, it may push Hezbollah into the abyss.

      Michael Young

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.