杏MAP导航

By Francesca Sabatinelli

A thousand days is a length of time that gives one pause for thought, that tells a story of incredible suffering.

Andrea Riccardi, an Italian historian and founder of the Community of Sant'Egidio, speaks to Vatican News about the sad anniversary of a conflict that, two years and nine months later, has not yet given way to peace.

Vatican News: Professor, recalling the 杏MAP导航鈥檚 words in Luxembourg, it seems no one has yet taken steps toward 鈥渉onorable compromises鈥� to build security and peace鈥�

Andrea Riccardi: We鈥檝e grown accustomed to the daily news, resigning ourselves to the continuation of this war. A thousand days is a span that makes one pause. Let me remind you that for Italy, World War I lasted 1,261 days, and it鈥檚 called the Great War; for the world, it lasted 1,568 days. A thousand days isn鈥檛 the story of a small conflict but of one that, on one hand, has devastated an entire country, Ukraine, and on the other, has changed the world. And this is because, as the 杏MAP导航 rightly says, we are in a state of quasi-global war, shadowed by the nuclear threat.

We have resurrected a culture of war and banished peace and dialogue from the lexicon of international relations. Today, the discourse revolves around weapons, geostrategies, and military operations, with little thought for looking beyond. Dialogue as a method is dismissed, and the pursuit of peace is abandoned. Even the word "peace" is shunned.

The 杏MAP导航鈥檚 words stem from the grim realization that these thousand days have served no purpose but to exact a terrible toll on Ukraine. This war, with Russia鈥檚 violent aggression against a free nation like Ukraine, has inflicted enormous suffering on the Ukrainians themselves. From the very start, I鈥檝e spoken of peace and negotiation. Every time I hear the 杏MAP导航鈥檚 words, I feel comforted. I speak of peace not from a pro-Russian stance but out of love for the Ukrainian people, who have been ravaged by war. There are 14 million vulnerable individuals in need of aid, 6鈥�7 million refugees abroad, and nearly 4 million internally displaced persons.

I鈥檝e been to Ukraine and witnessed sights I hadn鈥檛 seen since childhood after World War II: so many war amputees on the streets. Consider also the mental anguish among civilians and soldiers, the plight of the elderly. It鈥檚 a society overwhelmed and impoverished, reduced by 10 million people. Why must they bear this price? They were attacked, resisted, and responded to aggression. But can鈥檛 another path be found?

Many argue it鈥檚 impossible or not the right time. They say speaking of this amounts to selling out Ukraine. No one wants that. We want Ukraine to thrive, which is why negotiation and peace are imperative. It鈥檚 not an impossibility; reclaiming the audacity of negotiation is a necessity.

Diplomacy must be practiced, contacts pursued, and efforts made to break the chains of war. Among world leaders, I find the 杏MAP导航鈥檚 stance the most forward-looking. He鈥檚 denounced war as evil, championed negotiation, and, through Cardinal Zuppi鈥檚 mission, kept channels open with all parties and beyond. Through humanitarian and diplomatic contacts, a roadmap has been outlined: keep talking. Yet diplomatic channels are entirely severed鈥攁 tragedy, as rebuilding bridges once they鈥檙e broken is arduous.

VN: It seems the international community, over the course of these thousand days, has done more to support the war than to oppose it, as harsh as that may sound鈥�

AR: Let鈥檚 not say "international community," because the community we once referred to no longer exists. Let鈥檚 speak of the West鈥擭ATO, Europe鈥攚hich increasingly appear to be the same entity. They鈥檝e been caught up in the euphoria of war and victory following Ukraine鈥檚 courageous resistance, risking an indirect war fought by Ukrainians but supported by the West.

The international community as we knew it is gone. Consider the emergence of widespread criticism of the conflict, particularly in the Global South. Russia鈥檚 alignment with China is another grave issue. Historical ties between Russia and Europe have, unsurprisingly, collapsed.

In the wake of Russia鈥檚 invasion, a militaristic fervor took hold. While I鈥檓 not an expert on military affairs, I鈥檝e never believed that Russia could be defeated through sanctions or militarily. Not that Russia hasn鈥檛 suffered in this war, but its vast human and economic resources enable it to endure. Ukraine, however, is far less resilient and has been painfully weakened by relentless Russian bombardment.

VN: If thus far leaders have spoken only of arms and war, is it time, as you suggest, to propose creative diplomatic and negotiation strategies? On what foundations, given today鈥檚 situation?

AR: Peace is more urgent than ever, especially as winter looms. Sixty-five percent of Ukraine鈥檚 electricity production capacity has been targeted by missile strikes. This winter could bring death to many Ukrainians. Peace is needed, and quickly.

There鈥檚 no magic formula. We must begin by talking, by sitting at the same table. But this is complex; it requires establishing diplomatic channels. I believe negotiation is possible. Just two months after the war began, an agreement was close鈥攗ntil some Western countries advised Ukraine against it.

We should start now with humanitarian issues: reuniting families, exchanging prisoners and the bodies of fallen soldiers. Contacts must be sought at all levels because the walls of hatred and war propaganda are towering. Ukraine must not be sold out at the peace table. Everything must be negotiated.

Then there鈥檚 the immense task of Ukraine鈥檚 reconstruction鈥攁 monumental effort requiring significant steps and meetings. Every possible bridge must be opened, and quickly.

For us believers, there remains the 鈥渨eak force鈥� of prayer, imploring peace from the One who can grant it despite the "lords of war." I am astonished that, in Sunday Masses, prayers are offered for many intentions but rarely for peace. Prayer is our protest against war and the wellspring of hope, which animates dialogue.