Soon after Russia unleashed its blitzkrieg against Ukraine, the global media started churning out a number of ideologically laden, politically biased, and historically confusing explanations to what really prompted Russia to invade Ukraine. This, however, seems irrelevant for now and will be better left for later.

Right now, we should concern ourselves with the most fundamental question: How and in what way will Russia’s invasion of Ukraine impact the post-Cold War security structure and what is the way forward to avoid further escalation?

So far, the West seems too flabbergasted to act or react beyond imposing economic sanctions on Russia and condemning Putin’s deadly game of political brinkmanship and military adventure. This is because the cost and risks of a war with Russia far outweighs the benefits, especially when a direct military confrontation with Moscow can escalate into a third world war; a gut-wrenching scenario to imagine.

Against this backdrop, it seems that the only recourse is to ramp up diplomatic isolation of Russia and squeeze its economy. This, too, seems untenable. If sanctions could not subdue countries like Cuba, Iran and North Korea, how can they bring Russia to its knees? Even if EU stops buying Russian gas and oil, who will dissuade countries like China, India and Pakistan from doing business with Russia? Out of the 141 countries that voted in favour of a UN General Assembly resolution ‘deploring’ Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, how many will be willing to sever diplomatic and economic ties with Moscow?

Apparently, the state of global affairs has entered a cul-de-sac. This situation calls for a radical overhaul of the international security and economic system. This is because the current course of actions will entail a lot more cost in terms of human sufferings, economic pain, geopolitical uncertainties and constant fear of war. Can the West absorb 10 million more refugees from Ukraine? Who will substitute Russia for oil, gas and wheat supply to the world? How will EU cope with its immediate energy needs if Russia retaliates by shutting gas and oil supply to Europe? If this rather egoistic curse of action continues unabated, the world will plunge into economic recession, civil wars, refugee exodus and unprecedented proliferation of conventional and unconventional armaments.

Therefore, the four major international players - the US, China, Russia and European Union/ UK should hold a Yalta-type conference with an aim to redefine and restructure the post-Ukrainian war international security system. For this course of action to proceed let alone make any notable headway, the parties involved will have to make major compromises. For example, Russia will have to return Donbas regions to Ukraine, while Ukraine and the NATO will have to guarantee the autonomy of Donetsk and Luhansk. Moreover, Ukraine and the NATO will have to recognise Crimea as part of Russia and the NATO will have to freeze its eastward expansion. This will pave the way for other major geo-economic and geopolitical issues to be resolved amicably.

However, given the prevalent general anti-Russia mood in the West, this course of action seems highly unlikely to be taken. This leaves us with little choice but to proceed with the current course of action i.e., to isolate Russia diplomatically, and cripple its economy through the imposition of punitive sanctions. The West must not lose sight of reason and pragmatism which require well calculated geo-economic and geo-political moves. If it wants to prevent further escalation and chaos in global affairs, the West will have to allow a steady emergence of a multipolar world order, underpinned, understood, and dealt in accordance with the rules of conventional geopolitics. The West can bleed Russia, if it must, but it should not pull the plug on Russian economy, for Putin can then become a magnet for countries that feel disgruntled with the US and the West.

Likewise, the West can further isolate Putin but it should not push Russia to the wall, lest it, as warned by Dmitry Medvedev, breaks the strategic stability dialogue and gives it all up, together with the New START. One does not need a Kantian mind to understand the consequences of turning Putin’s Russia into a pariah-state. Doing this will do more harm than good.

The writer is a visiting lecturer at Chiba Institute of Science (University) Choshi, Chiba Prefecture, Japan. Imranptii.4999@gmail.com