Recap of the ‘Peace Atelier’ On 19 May 2022, the The World Needs You’s Peace Atelier took place. The Atelier was in line with the SDG agenda in which Peace features prominently. The main theme was the war in Ukraine. The participants tried to formulate answers to 4 questions that were made by Prof. Dr. Alexander Mattelaer, who specialises in war subjects such as the NATO and defense policy. With his expertise, he was the perfect moderator for this debate. The group was diverse, with a lot of respect for each other’s opinions and room for input. The following is a brief overview of the multitude of ideas that the group formulated in response to the questions. The Atelier immediately took off with a challenging question: what is the aim of legitimate Ukrainian resistance? From a legal point of view, the armed resistance by the Ukrainian state and population is eminently legitimate. Yet armed resistance cannot help but raise moral and strategic questions too, for it implies waging war even when desiring peace. This was the starting point to answer this question. The group talked about how Ukraine should defend as much possible of its territory on the one hand and referred to growing anxiety in Europe about Ukraine succeeding on the other hand. The latter increases the chance of revenge on Putin’s side, which brings in the discussion of negotiating with Russia and Ukraine losing territory. This is difficult because Ukrainians can and are giving a push as long as they keep Putin from launching nuclear weapons and are working together with the world for this, but the so-called peace promotors say we should not support Ukraine to keep nuclear weapons away. The group did not find a one-sided answer to this duality, but it was an interesting discussion. However, they did all agree that it is legitimate to defend your territory. But this again raises difficulties, since it is a political question of what a territory – and thus a country – is. Is it just the people or the borders? What about the people that are already in Russia? Should resistance go further than borders? These are questions that still need to be answered. Furthermore, there was a debate on Russian concerns and grievances, such as the fact that the Russian President Vladimir Putin claims the war presents a reaction to a threat to Russian security. The general thought was that they are not legitimate but should be taken into consideration. NATO and Europe’s enlargement is a difficult question concerning Russia; it is the right of every sovereign state to choose alliances. According to the participants, it is also important to keep in mind that the way we are looking at the world is very different from Russia. We are liberal, but Russia is stuck in the 19th century and state propaganda and at the same time, Russians share a cultural heartline with Ukraine. Some voices arose that it is a big part of the west's fault that we have not taken Russia's concerns into account for a very long time and not have been able to find solutions when needed. The Atelier went on to ask what possible war outcome would be the most conducive to sustainable peace. The group constated that there are quite some issues that are driving us into a future where there is no peace. It might be some cold peace into a more positive scenario. It reminds us of how much effort peace requires. It is not because we are in a dark spot now, that the whole future will be dark. It requires imagination to go from a dark to a brighter place. The group and Prof. Dr. Mattelaer agreed that we need to address challenges and move forward. The final question treated the membership of NATO that Ukraine sought in the past years. The country pursued European integration, even though this has antagonized its relations with
Moscow. More recently, the debate about Ukrainian membership in the EU has been accelerating. The participants agreed that NATO should offer support to Ukraine. In conclusion, it was a very high-quality conversation. Even if there is no easy solution to restore peace, the participants succeeded in engaging in the difficult issues and everyone came out a little bit smarter, moderate, and nuanced in their thinking. This progress – to try and learn – is the main goal of the Atelier and the definition of an Urban Engaged University.