Blessed are the peacemakers. But who will they be for the people of Ukraine and Russia?
The job of the peacemaker is to try and shed light on the awful truth of war in the hope that its futility will finally surface above all else.
THE bloody war in Ukraine has now raged for 12 long months and it is very clear no one really knows the true extent of the human cost.
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) estimate that at least 7,000 civilians have been killed as of February 5, 2023.
The OHCHR have predicted, however, that the real numbers are likely to be much higher.
In the same period 18.2m border crossings from Ukraine to other countries have been recorded as of January 31, 2023.
Accurate figures for military casualties are also incredibly hard to find. In November last year The Guardian reported America's top general as suggesting that 200,000 soldiers have died on both sides.
Recently Forbes went further and suggested that as many as 270,000 Russian soldiers may have been killed.
What is a little clearer on the first anniversary of this war is that no end to the conflict is in sight and that the bloodshed looks likely to worsen and continue for some time given the ever-increasing military hardware and jingoistic language being directed toward the region from all quarters.
In the world of an eye for an eye it would seem that blind men are certainly king.
Just this week, in a surprise visit to Ukraine, the US President Joe Biden promised an extra $500m in military ‘aid’, including long-range weaponry.
In response the Russian premier, Vladimir Putin, warned:
“If more long-range Western systems enter Ukraine, the further we will be forced to push the threat away from our borders."
It is truly frightening stuff given the players involved and you would think, therefore, that as a result peace-loving and neutral countries around the world would be scrambling over themselves to try and broker some space for peace talks.
But that is simply not the case and at the time of writing the only suggestion of peace talks are suggestions in some media that during an expected visit to Russia the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, may outline a proposed peace deal.
Whatever the Chinese may propose it is clear, however, that any hopes of peace talks and a subsequent deal will hinge on some sort of support for such talks from western aligned countries.
So who could those blessed peacemakers be?
Could it be an opportunity for the Irish government to stand back and reflect on whether our unique experience of imperialism, war and division could make us a powerful broker within the EU and the UN in bringing about such talks.
Our historic position within both organisations as string advocates of reconciliation in areas of global conflict would position us well for such a role.
Indeed, 12 years ago as Irish Foreign Minister, Michael Martin, set out - and received much international praise - for elucidating his and Ireland's hopes and aspirations for peace in the middle east.
On that day he said that peace talks between Israel and Palestine represented the only opportunity for a just settlement based on two states living side-by-side in peace and security. He was correct then and sadly - as conflict persists in that part of the world - remains correct today.
Again, in 2021, as this Republic's Taoiseach, Mr Martin told the UN:
“Ireland will continue to seek to use our voice, to defend our principles, and to make progress towards the peaceful resolution of some of the world’s most pressing conflicts.”
Speaking only months later and prior to the outbreak of war in Ukraine and to mark Ireland's adoption of a temporary seat on the UN Security Council, Mr Martin went on to pledge that Ireland had and would not take its responsibility lightly.
In a powerful and compelling address, the Cork man spoke about the lessons this Republic had learned from war in Ireland and how it had placed us in a unique position to see and envisage how peace was possible in all places of conflict.
Mr Martin called, at that time, on the Security Council members to set aside political differences which he said continued to act as an impediment to world peace.
“It is a lesson hard learned that when we, in this building, are divided, it is the most vulnerable who suffer the consequences.
“The promise of the Charter is to ‘save succeeding generations from the scourge of war’. Today, I call on all members of the Council to set aside political differences and to work to uphold that promise.”
Mr Martin was rightly lauded for those words.
Those sentiments were a far cry, however, from those he chose to mark his last UN speech as Taoiseach in September of last year. In that 22 minute address Mr Martin was strident in his condemnation of Russia.
The Taoiseach's description, at the time, of the world's largest country as a 'rogue state' leaving headline writers across the world salivating.
It was an address quickly followed by a press conference in which Mr Martin even suggested that Russia’s permanent place on the Security Council should be called into question.
Only days later it was further reported by the Brussels based EuObserver website that Ireland had joined Poland and other Baltic states in lobbying for more 'hawkish' Russian sanctions.
Why Ireland has adopted such a strident position on this conflict is a controversial and multi-faceted question that deserves much reflection and debate in its own right.
Irrespective of your position on that, however, surely we all have a duty to ask is the Irish government’s approach and internationally expressed position on this conflict really helping the world navigate a path towards peace and away from a wider conflagration, the consequences of which do not bear thinking about.
Surely the lessons learned after centuries of colonisation, subjugation and internal conflict within our own country would mean that our voice in the world would be much better suited to guiding and facilitating others in moves towards peace and reconciliation.
Instead we have become just another voice in a growing chorus of one-sided and often reductive condemnation and analysis.
There is no easy or quick solution to the Ukrainian question given the much bigger geo-political factors at play in the region and the historically and culturally complex Russo-Slavik melting-pot from which this conflict has emerged.
The one certainty of war, however, is that more and more innocents will die the longer it continues. The job of the peacemaker is to try and shed light on the awful truth of war in the hope that its futility will surface above all else.
Our own history, and that of our European neighbours, provides many examples of the human cost involved when the voices of such peacemakers are drowned out and ignored.
With the stakes just as high this time let's hope that amidst the family of nations we all inhabit some will find the courage to stand up and be the blessed peacemakers the world so badly needs.