Pavlovic: Russia has already lost the war and united the entire West

Russia lost the war in Ukraine when the invasion order was given, and legal experts need to determine whether genocide was committed in Ukraine, Dr. Srdja Pavlovic, a lecturer at the Department of History and Classics at the University of Alberta, told Radio Free Europe (RFE) in Canada.

Russia launched an invasion of Ukraine on February 24 with tens of thousands of troops. More than 11 million people have left the country, and Ukrainian institutions are investigating thousands of war crimes cases. The investigation was also initiated by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

On March 2, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution condemning the Russian aggression, which requested that it immediately stop using force against Ukraine.

Pavlovic believes that the situation in Ukraine is reflected in two ways in the Western Balkans, through a clearer definition of pro-Russian or anti-Western sentiment and through a more significant engagement of the West in the region.

Pavlovic added that there are strong indications that genocidal intent is now accepted as a strategic goal of Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine.

As he stated, apart from Bucha, there have been cases of killing civilians in several locations, which shows the systematic nature of military action when it comes to Ukrainian civilians.

“The systematic way is one of the characteristics of genocide. In addition, the rhetoric of official Russia – the characterization of Ukraine’s ethnic identity and Ukrainian statehood, above all – can serve as important evidence of genocidal intent. Whether or not this is genocide as a legally defined category will depend entirely on the nature of the evidence gathered and the prosecutor’s ability to prove the line of command responsibility in court as a reflection of a political decision made in advance”, Pavlovic said.

He pointed out that there is a possibility of wider conflicts, but, according to him, the question is the cost-effectiveness of such expansion for Russia.

“A large-scale conflict would involve a conflict with NATO members. “Such a conflict would not be cost-effective for either side, and I assume that Putin is aware of the outcome of such a conflict.”

“Some political elites and a large number of people in our area see these events through the prism of domestic experiences from the recent past: NATO interventions in the so-called Republika Srpska and later in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, but also through the prism of extensive Western assistance to Kosovo’s independence. Today, such analytical glasses present Ukraine as a tool of the hated West that wants to erase some spark of Slavism embodied in Russia and Putin, he added.

He added that every military action of Russia is imposed and defensive at the same time, because, as he said, it is of existential importance.

According to him, the way in which crimes committed in Ukraine are denied is very similar to the way nationalists in the Balkans do.

“If we change geographical locations, the Russian argument sometimes sounds like a literal translation of the statements of our deniers of crime.”

In his opinion, Russia lost this war the moment the invasion order was given.

“It has already been said that Putin managed to achieve what Western liberal societies have not been able to do for decades: to unite those societies at the level of defending strategic interests and to give NATO military alliance new legitimacy and relevance”, Pavlovic said.

He also said that official announcements and events on the ground clearly show who is the aggressor and who is the victim, so determining this issue should not be a moral or political problem for anyone.

Of course, after the evidence is collected, it remains to legally determine the type of military conflict, but that future court proceedings are not an obstacle for us to decide now on the war in Ukraine – our determination is not a legally valid court verdict, but a moral act of support for the victim”.

Given the situation in Ukraine and significant Russian influence across the Western Balkans, NATO membership is very beneficial for Montenegro, Pavlovic said.

“I believe that, apart from the obvious aspect of military assistance and the contractual obligation to protect member states, this membership has enabled official Montenegro to, despite the opposition of a large part of the executive and legislative branches, clearly decide on Russian aggression against Ukraine,” Pavlovic concluded.