The end game: Is war a perfect solution?

We live in times when posing with guns on social media gives you an illusion of winning the war. It’s sympathetic to an extent but insane in reality. While the entire world is busy posturing to do the right thing, the repercussions would be inconvenient. The economics of war is complicated and is often ignored. The military spending was the highest in 2019 since Cold War and so the policy makers are forced to justify the fund allocation through wars. 57% of the world’s ammunition comes from the US, 22% from the western Europe, 9.5% from the Russian Federation, and the rest from Japan, India, China, and South Korea. So, when you see an idiot posing with a gun on a social media platform, would you still like it?

Conflict in Ukraine is termed as an biggest assault on Europe since World War II. I hope this relates to the largest migration that is happening right now. Canada and EU will accept immigrants but where is the US and UK in all this. In fact, the conflict is an unnecessary provocation from the US and only justifies the much needed diversion from its core policies. The Russian Federation’s tactical (not strategic) nuclear threat was an indication to end the war but the impression in the media was created as such that only the Russian Federation is willing to extend the war. The easiest solution for Ukraine was to hold ceasefire talks with Russia and end the conflict. But, is it convenient for the western world after spending too much on military? In 2012, NBC news published an article about the companies profiting the most from a war.

The US will going to inflate the number of civilian deaths just as it did during the Kosovo War to continue its involvement in the situation. The US involvement is necessary for another reason as well. The numbers game is a necessity just as it was during the pandemic. At least a few research suggests that the SARS-COV-2 virus was indeed first discovered in Europe and recently the US has acknowledged about the biological research facilities in Ukraine which they have later discarded again as Russian propaganda. All this makes Mr. Zelensky’s silence more important and a steady pro-US approach.

The west will continue to show its liking for Ukraine but won’t do enough to avoid a direct conflict with Russia. Mr. Zelensky has already realized this and so NATO membership is not useful anymore. He is still pushing for an EU membership but EU won’t be expediting the process as EU membership too gurantees support in terms of military which can only escalate the matter with the Russian Federation. No arms manufacturing company needs a World War III as it might end them too. Instead, the best option for the west is to continue with a series of steady sanctions on the Russian Federation to keep the conflict afloat at least for a few more months. A series of smaller conflicts are more beneficial in economics of war. This is one of the reasons that we see a conflict quite often over a span of every two years.

So, how long we will see this situation and what’s the end game? I mean people might get bored listening and reading the same news over and again. The arms manufacturing companies might give a green signal to governments to ease sanctions just when the profits will be earned. The end game might entail relaxing the western sanctions over time and as we get closer to the winters. There is a greater threat for EU that Mr. Putin might impose counter-sanctions. So an end game is near and possible but is not convenient for the common people.