The war in Ukraine should not be compared to either World War I or World War II, as it possesses unique characteristics of the 21st century, opinion editor Erkki Bahovski writes in his weekly commentary.
On March 22, The Financial Times reported that the United States is pressuring Ukraine to refrain from attacking Russian oil refineries. According to the newspaper, the Biden administration is concerned that damages to the Russian oil infrastructure would weaken Russian oil exports and, thus, increase fuel prices worldwide. An increase in fuel prices before the US presidential elections is not favorable for Biden's reelection campaign.
While the Financial Times article could be considered one of many speculations about the war, the US Department of State confirmed its contents four days later. In response to a question about the US warning to Ukrainians at a press conference, spokesman for the US Department of State Matthew Miller said, «...it has always been our position since the outset of this war that we do not encourage or support Ukraine taking strikes outside its own territory.»
The Americans' warning to the Ukrainians clearly indicates that the current war in Ukraine cannot be compared to either World War I or World War II. Yes, there are similarities: the use of mass armies and stalemates at the front (as in World War I). But attitudes are fundamentally different, especially considering World War II.
When French President Emmanuel Macron attempted to call leader of the Russian regime Vladimir Putin at the start of the war, questions arose immediately, such as whether Winston Churchill called Adolf Hitler during World War II. Now, one might ask whether anyone would have advised the anti-German coalition not to bomb Germany in World War II.
The Americans' warning to the Ukrainians clearly indicates that the current war in Ukraine cannot be compared to either World War I or World War II.
However, there is little point in such comparisons because the full-scale war in Ukraine cannot be fought in the past. Americans and Russians continue with a joint space program, and the Paris Olympics are still scheduled to take place with the participation of Russian athletes. In choosing NATO's new secretary-general, efforts are made to find someone who does not speak too harshly to Russia.
Thus, it must be acknowledged that the war in Ukraine is a uniquely 21st-century conflict, complete with social media, drones, and information warfare. Additionally, it has to be recognized that for the West, the title of ultimate evil still belongs to Nazi Germany, while Russia continues to be given a pass.
Of course, the nuclear dimension adds complexity. Russia is a country with a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons. A generation of politicians raised during the Cold War cannot shake off their doomsday scenarios.
The Americans' warning to Ukrainians to avoid attacking Russian oil infrastructure conveniently provides an excellent excuse for German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to continue delaying the sending of TAURUS missiles to Ukraine. The warning offers Russia an opportunity to draw parallels between Ukraine and Israel. The United States has repeatedly asked Israel to avoid excessive use of force in Gaza. Despite Ukrainians not killing Russian civilians. This narrative can further be compounded by the Moscow terrorist attack, which the Kremlin also forcefully attributes to Ukraine, thus completing the comparison with Israel.
Unfortunately, the attitude of holding back Ukraine is purely racist – Ukrainians can be killed for the sake of low gasoline prices, without them getting a chance to defend themselves effectively. This raises questions, especially considering the numerous lectures the West has given on combating racism. Where do these principles stand now?