Former prime minister Tony Abbott says ceasefire alone ‘not enough in Ukraine’

Former prime minister Tony Abbott says without ‘meaningful security guarantees’ a ceasefire would only signal a pause in Russia’s ambition to overthrow Ukraine’s democracy.

Former prime minister Tony Abbot at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Ukraine is India’s opportunity to declare itself as the world’s other democratic superpower and to offer its services in the cause of peace with freedom, Tony Abbott says.

The former Australian prime minister raised the option of Indian peacekeepers in Ukraine at the Raisina Dialogue in New Delhi last week and argues that India is well placed to do this.

“India is a nuclear power with a million-plus strong standing army,” Mr Abbott write in The Australian on Wednesday.

“India has a long and close relationship with Russia, dating to the Cold War when America’s unwise tilt to Pakistan made the old Soviet Union India’s principal arms supplier.

“Out of respect for past friendship, India has carefully avoided taking sides in the current conflict – although Prime Minister Narendra Modi has openly chastised President (Vladimir) Putin for using war as an instrument of national policy.”

Mr Abbott says ending the bloodshed in Ukraine, without turning it into a Russian colony, is one of the greatest challenges of contemporary statecraft.

He dismissed the idea of a peacekeeping force in Ukraine by a coalition of the willing, which the Albanese government has pledged to consider contributing to if it becomes an option.

“Britain and Europe say they are prepared to step into the breach to keep supporting Ukraine; but allies that have long surrendered their ability to wage war on their own are unlikely to risk it without the American back-up that Donald Trump is unlikely to give,” he writes.

Mr Abbott says that without meaningful security guarantees, any ceasefire would not be “peace”; just a pause before the next Russian invasion or a coerced lapse into Russian satellite status such as Belarus.

“It’s becoming obvious that even the limited supply of weaponry, not enough to win but enough not to lose, that’s hitherto been available, could be cut off by a US president craving a ‘deal’, any deal, regardless of its long-term consequences for Ukraine’s freedom and independence,” he writes.

Mr Abbott argues that Russia’s terms would ultimately dismember Ukraine.

“Vladimir Putin’s demands, that the US President seems inclined to accept, are that he keeps the Ukrainian territory already conquered, that Ukraine becomes ‘neutral’ and never joins NATO, and that there are no ­European troops on Ukraine’s soil,” he writes.

“The pity of this is that Ukraine would end up dismembered; without, in the process, achieving the right to forge the same future of freedom and opportunity that Poland, for instance, has managed, once free from Russian overlordship.

“To President Putin’s mind, the moment Ukraine succeeds beyond Russia, via creating a vigorous democracy, a vibrant civil society, or a liberal competitive economy free of cronyism, it would be at the mercy of a further invasion.

“The brutal truth is that without meaningful security guarantees, any ceasefire would not be ‘peace’; just a pause before the next Russian invasion or a coerced lapse into Russian satellite status such as Belarus.”

Mr Abbott warns that any Russian promise to respect Ukrainian independence would be as insubstantial as the 1994 ­Budapest Memorandum where Russia, the US and Britain guaranteed Ukrainian territorial integrity in return for Ukraine surrendering its share of the old Soviet nuclear arsenal.

That deal turned out not to be worth the paper it was written on, Mr Abbott writes.

“Why shouldn’t India finally take the place in the management of the world’s affairs that’s commensurate with its size and its strength? Here’s a moment for India to declare itself as the world’s other democratic superpower and to offer its services in the cause of peace with freedom.”