Completely absent in any of the governmental efforts for the last three and a half years to end the war on Ukraine is the issue of self-determination as it relates concretely to where the on-the-ground war and the huge percentage of casualties are primarily happening.

The principle of nations having the right to make decisions about the form and nature of their governments goes back over 100 years and has long been upheld by the United Nations and most of the world’s governments.

When it comes to the Russia/Ukraine war this principle clearly applies to Ukraine’s efforts to defend its territory, economy and form of government from Russia’s 2022 military invasion, intended to extinguish Ukraine as a self-determining country.

But so far, from neither the United Nations nor any other country, has the concept of self-determination been applied to the reality that it is in eastern Ukraine, the four provinces of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, where the path to a just and peaceful end to this terrible war lies. Following a ceasefire and other necessary steps to prepare for them, there should be binding referendums under United Nations supervision so that each of these four provinces can decide whether they want to be part of Russia or part of Ukraine.

It would be essential that these referendums be under the auspices of a neutral entity, which is why the United Nations is the logical choice.

Is this point of view pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian? It seems to me it is neither. Neither side wants to risk losing territory it considers to be its own via a popular vote which would put the stamp of political legitimacy on the results. Of course, the alternative seems to be a continuation for years if not decades of destructive and dangerous military conflict, tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars wasted and tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of additional deaths.

Would the implementation of such a deal set a precedent for situations elsewhere in the world where there is conflict over territory between more-or-less distinct peoples? It probably would, but is such a precedent a bad thing? In a world where democracy is under threat by fascists and authoritarians, a successful application of the democratic principle of self-determination would be a ray of light, a hopeful development.

Is there an alternative that is more just, more likely of success, more likely to end this brutal, destructive and dangerous war and allow for positive economic and social rebuilding? That must be the objective.