Reader TTS

After two months of the Russo-Ukrainian War, we have almost become accustomed to good news from the front. We take for granted the tactical ingenuity and superior generalship of the

defenders on the battlefield, the heroic resistance of civilians no less than soldiers, together with the valiant leadership of Volodomyr Zelensky, ever-ready to inspire his people and

mobilise the free world. As for the Russians: we hardly know whether to be more astonished by their incompetence or appalled by their cruelty. The physical decline of Vladimir Putin, his

hands shaking and his face a mask, symbolise the malfunctioning of his war machine. Yet there is one sense in which Putin is slowly but surely gaining the upper hand. This war is being

fought, remember, on the soil of Ukraine. The terrible destruction that is being visited upon that land, day by day, is almost impossible for us to grasp. However vivid the footage of human

suffering and burnt-out buildings, only those old enough to recall the Second World War, or who have witnessed first-hand comparably bitter conflicts elsewhere, can comprehend the scale of

devastation now being inflicted by Russia. The best-known example is Mariupol, now a smoking ruin where once half a million people lived. The cost of restoring that city alone to anything

like its condition last February has been estimated at $100 billion. Multiply that figure to take account of war damage across the entirety of this enormous country, including the huge areas

now occupied by Russian and separatist forces, and it is likely that the total cost already exceeds $1 trillion. This is an almost unimaginable sum for Europe’s poorest nation, measured by

GDP per capita. Before the war, Ukraine’s GDP was estimated at a nominal $99 billion ($600 billion measured by PPP), having suffered a huge fall after the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea

and conflict in Donbas. The impact of this year’s invasion on the economy has been catastrophic. GDP has already been cut by at least 45 per cent. Some 10 per cent of Ukrainians have fled

the country, another 20 per cent are displaced and instead of being one of the world’s major exporters of foodstuffs, millions are now dependent on aid to survive. This grim picture becomes

even darker when we consider the fate of those living under Russian occupation. Credible reports suggest that between half a million and three quarters of a million civilians have been

deported to Russia or Belarus. Their fate can only be imagined, as Putin’s neo-Stalinist ideology is pitiless towards his enemies. Those (like Donald Trump, in his interview with Piers

Morgan) who urge the West to “do a deal” with Putin do not realise what they are asking of the Ukrainians. The Kremlin’s declared war aims include “demilitarisation” and “denazification” of

Ukraine. A “demilitarised” Ukraine would place 40 million people at the mercy of a mass murderer. “Denazification” means that all Ukrainian nationalists would be treated as potential “Nazis”

and despatched to filtration camps. Russian forces are already treating POWs in this way, if they spare them at all. Mass graves and other evidence of war crimes or crimes against humanity

are being discovered every time Ukrainians recapture territory. The human cost of this war is, of course, even more destructive and irreparable than the material damage. But the destruction

of infrastructure also has consequences for the future recovery of Ukraine. Nuclear power plants are only the most obvious example of potential environmental disaster, but there are many

others. Imagine what the loss of Silicon Valley would do to the economy of California, or indeed the United States. Ukraine’s equivalent, the hi tech industry in and around Kharkiv, has

already been devastated by the battle for control of that great city. Not only Ukraine’s past, its cultural and natural heritage, but its future, its human networks, have been cast to the

winds. Instead, Ukraine has been forced to transform itself into a war economy: able to defend itself, perhaps, but lacking in all but the most basic necessities of life. This bravest of

nations is being reduced to penury. Surely, though, Ukraine will quickly recover, once the war is over. When we consider how soon after 1945 both Germany and Japan enjoyed their “economic

miracles”, this seems plausible. But Ukraine is not so fortunate in its geography. Even in the best case scenario, with Putin’s troops defeated and evicted from its land, Ukrainians would

remain vulnerable to Russian revanchism. The threat of a return to war would act as a brake on foreign investment for the foreseeable future. Even in the unlikely event of some modern

iteration of the postwar Marshall Plan, with hundreds of billions of development aid poured in from the US and the EU, the private sector that is so essential to prosperity would be wary of

the existential menace emanating from Moscow. My purpose is not to convey the message that the West can do nothing for Ukraine, but rather the opposite. We are not doing nearly enough. The

grand total of military and financial support for Ukraine so far does not compensate for a fraction of the sacrifices its people have already made. Weeks ago Charles Michel, the EU High

Representative, told the European Parliament that the EU’s aid thus far amounted to less than €1 billion, while the total paid by EU members to Russia for energy came to €35 billion. That

disproportion has been only somewhat mitigated since. Some of the poorest European countries have given the most, the richest the least. President Macron and Chancellor Scholz, in

particular, should both be ashamed of their abdication of responsibility and leadership. Joe Biden has done much better, but he is still too nervous of Putin’s nuclear sabre-rattling. Let us

hope that his Secretaries of State and Defense, who visited Kyiv this week, will persuade him to expand US military and economic support. The UK has done better than France or Germany, but

our contribution is still not remotely sufficient for a relatively rich country that prides itself on its generosity to developing nations and on its loyalty to allies. If Boris Johnson were

to announce that last year’s cut of 0.2 per cent of GDP in development aid — a sum of around £5 billion per annum — were now to be devoted entirely to Ukraine, we could hold our heads high.

Helping Ukraine would also indirectly benefit some of the poorest regions in the world, which depend heavily on grain and other food from “the breadbasket of Europe”. Once the British

Government sets an example to the rest of Europe, it will have a powerful impact. Our neighbours have noticed how the British Army has been training Ukrainians and supplying them with the

weapons they need. This has made a big difference to the course of the war, but it is nowhere near enough to put victory within their grasp. Intelligence now expects the war to continue at

least for the rest of this year. The Prime Minister must not be distracted from his task by storms in the Westminster teacup. He needs to tell the country why the Ukrainians’ fight is also

ours, and why we should be ready to make sacrifices, not only for their sake but for our own. A MESSAGE FROM THEARTICLE _We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle.

We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a donation._