Snow was being blown against apartment buildings scorched black and with all their windows broken. Ownerless dogs were prowling in packs.

Areas around the airport in the Ukrainian city of Hostomel, which came under intense fire from Russian forces early in the war, now lie in ruins.

In December, air raid sirens sounded day and night in the capital of Kyiv. When the alarms rang, the inhabitants stopped whatever work or household chores they were doing to huddle together in freezing-cold underground shelters.

One resident said a number of air raid shelters had taken direct hits, killing those who had sought safety there. To take shelter or not: the choice “is, every time, like a lottery where your own life is at stake,” the resident said.

This is what everyday life is like in time of war.

Explosions and alarms are ringing out across Ukraine even as the calendar takes the country into the New Year.

ANTIWAR IDEALS 

Residents of areas exposed to incessant missile and drone attacks earlier this winter frantically sought temporary places to live elsewhere.

Among them was painter Anna Belousova from the mid-southern Ukrainian region of Zaporizhzhia, where Russian forces occupied a nuclear power plant. Belousova took refuge with a relative in Kyiv as the fighting intensified in her home region.

When asked about pathways to an end of the war, one Ukrainian citizen said, “We will be able to recover all territories by summer.” Another asserted the war will be over in early spring.

The most often-heard English word was “victory.”

The Ukrainians are not being optimistic about the state of the war. They all appeared to have convinced themselves that a victory over Russia is the only available option for their future.

Ukraine's citizens desperately wanted more assistance from the international community and appeared disappointed in the international agencies that are responsible for settling disputes.

A jurist lamented that the International Criminal Court is too slow in investigating war crimes.

One university teacher of international politics said: “The United Nations has proven to be of no use. I just don’t know what on earth I have been teaching international law to students for.”

The United Nations has indeed proven to be impotent in this matter. The Security Council has failed to adopt a single resolution against the illegal war of aggression because Russia, a permanent member, has exercised its veto power.

Looking back, we learn that European intellectuals have been on a quest since early-modern times to find mechanisms to stop nations from going rogue.

Emeric Cruce, a 17th-century French cleric, proposed a world federation system in the middle of the 30 Years’ War (1618-1648), Europe’s biggest religious war. The system was supposed to have a permanent assembly of ambassadors and able to resort to military force to confront states that resisted arbitration awards.

In the 18th century, British philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) came up with the idea of a court for settling disputes, whereas Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) of Germany advocated the need for a “federation of states.”

Those ideals were first embodied in the League of Nations.

The league left its footprint by defining war of aggression as an international crime, but it ended up disbanding only 26 years after its establishment due a conflict of the interests of major powers.

The League of Nations weakened partly because the United States, the initiator of its foundation, never joined. It was further weakened when Japan walked out after coming under fire for its rule over Manchukuo, in northeastern China, and the league ousted the Soviet Union.

In founding the United Nations, the league’s successor, the five World War II victors of the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union, France and China devised the privileged right of veto for themselves so the world body will not fall apart with major powers walking out.

The five countries, however, turned their veto power into an instrument for pushing through their own interests. The Security Council degenerated into a clashing ground for the egos of major powers.

OVERRIDING POWERLESSNESS

Being in wartorn Ukraine opens one’s eyes to harrowing realities.

We learn, for example, that humankind has yet to find ways to stop this barbaric act called war and come up with an effective framework for holding back despotic acts of a single, high-handed leader. We stand powerless, despite our advanced technology, civilization, cross-border flow of people and globalized trade.

We realize the true aspect of war consists of mass killing, which is about destroying what frugal daily livelihoods people are maintaining and burning out their living flesh. We also realize that, once people are caught up in the whirlwind of war, surviving and winning become their topmost priorities.

We have also learned that a war in the east of Europe can cause pain to people across the globe through a structural chain of finance, food and energy.

We must stop, as soon as possible, this war that is unfolding before our eyes. At the same time, we should begin figuring out sound ways to prevent conflicts from breaking out. With the new year, we should follow in the footsteps of our predecessors, who fully exercised their minds to this task, in assembling our wisdom to pursue the pacifist goal with an eye toward the future of humankind.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Jan. 1