Sometimes, during the course of a war, there is one massacre too many, the one that changes the course of history. This is the case of the terrible bombing of the Sarajevo market, which in 1995 prompted NATO to intervene against the Bosnian Serbs.
Today the chilling images of the Buča massacre near Kiev, broadcast repeatedly, cross a threshold in the horror of this war. President Volodymyr Zelenskii speaks of “genocide”, Westerners of “war crimes”. Russia, on the other hand, is behaving as usual, responding to the accusations with its “alternative truth” and even calling the UN Security Council to denounce the “provocations of the Ukrainian radicals”.
Will the unanimous reaction of the West in the face of this massacre really change the situation as it did in other conflicts of the past? In reality this is not necessarily the case. The horror is undeniable, but the equation does not change: no one in the West is ready to risk a confrontation with Russia, a nuclear power. However, Buča’s images create great pressure on Western countries to support Ukraine more effectively at a decisive moment.
Fights on the rise
Right now we are witnessing a turning point in the war, with the reconquest of the Kiev region by the Ukrainian army and the withdrawal of Russian soldiers. Despite the Buča tragedy, the success of the Ukrainian resistance prevented the siege and possibly the conquest of the capital.
But this is not the end of the war, because the Russians are retreating to the east to form a territorial continuity block between the Donbass, the coast of the Sea of Azov (with the siege of the port city of Mariupol) and the Crimea. The fighting will not subside. Indeed, they will become more and more ferocious.
In this dramatic context, we are once again talking about Russian-Ukrainian negotiations. A new round of consultations will take place on 4 April in Istanbul. Optimistic voices are filtering out of Moscow and Kiev that even speak of the possibility of a direct dialogue between Zelenskii and Putin, which in itself would be a great step forward.
But is it really possible to negotiate against the backdrop of this massacre? On the Ukrainian front, a double objective emerges, in a certain sense contradictory: on the one hand, the immediate end of the suffering of the war, even at the cost of concessions such as neutrality and the freezing of territorial conflicts; on the other, the deep desire, based on the exceptional unity and determination shown in this war, not to yield anything to the invader. Buča’s deaths inevitably reinforce the desire to resist and undoubtedly also the desire to take revenge.
The problem will arise when there is a compromise on the table, a moment that will inevitably come, as in all wars. Concessions and renunciations will be needed, as happens in any compromise. Will Zelenskii be able to accept them and make his people accept them after all the horrors of war?
One last question: will the unity of Westerners survive in the face of a compromise that will be evaluated differently according to the latitudes? Some countries are more ready than others to accept this path. This moment of the war’s truth has not yet arrived. For now, the dead in Buča require strengthening support for Ukraine in all areas, including energy. And from this point of view it is certainly the massacre “too many”.
(Translation by Andrea Sparacino)