By Hiroki Sugita,
The war in Ukraine has entered its second year without any realistic prospects for peace, or even a cease-fire.
Having been inundated by the confronting news and images emerging from Ukraine's battlefields, some people have criticized media outlets for providing superficial coverage which they believe fails to contribute to ending the conflict.
When asked to respond to those criticisms, as a journalist covering international affairs and even wars, I have to partially agree. I believe that coverage of the Ukraine conflict should be richer in context and depth.
The media can play a role in swaying the course of events, but in most cases we can have the most impact when we report facts thoroughly apart from political positions.
Firstly, we need to report how deeply President Vladimir Putin and his people resent the humiliation Russia felt in the years since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Various arguments are cited when seeking to understand the causes of the war.
Putin's irrational decision-making is one, and the nation's victim mentality due to NATO's expansion is another. Expansionist Slavic ethnonationalism, which aims to incorporate Ukrainians into Russia based on the nations' historical links, is also blamed.
On the other hand, we tend to overlook the international political developments since the end of the Cold War.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, the absolute victory of Western liberalism was taken as a fait accompli by media worldwide. A considerable sense of relief that the threat of nuclear war had been removed owing to the end of the Cold War was shared globally.
Then, people in the West began considering Russia as lesser and treating it as a minor nation, even though it still had a vast geographical presence, natural resources and industries, and military power including a huge number of nuclear warheads.
This sense of resentment bordering on hatred became entrenched in Russia, including within Putin, though he was perceived in the West as just a disgruntled figure who could be ignored.
In 2014, after Russia suddenly annexed Crimea from Ukraine and was expelled from the G-8, I had an opportunity to meet and interview Putin.
His belief was that the G-8 was perceived to be a place where major countries gathered to discuss and make international rules, but in truth it was a place where leaders met just to approve what the United States proposed.
Putin said he was pleased to be liberated from such a humiliating role as subordinate to Washington.
The Russian leader's simmering anger is difficult to understand for Japanese people, who have accepted American values and now believe they are the foundation of Japan's post-World War II success.
Individuals understand foreign affairs based on their own values. However, people in other countries have their own history and values, and their judgments may be very different from ours.
One of the roles of international reporting is to cast light on various perspectives around the world and give the audience the ability to access different viewpoints relatively and objectively. In that sense, much deeper reporting is needed in covering the war in Ukraine.
I think there is no doubt Putin himself is the biggest cause of the conflict and he should be held responsible for the inhumane war in Ukraine. But international reporting should widen its scope to include other causes which contributed to Russia launching the invasion.
Some argue Ukraine should have made more efforts to exhaust diplomatic solutions, and made compromises with Russia.
For Ukrainians, that is not an attractive option when they can look to the post-Cold War success enjoyed by their Polish neighbors.
Poland, which had similar economic performances to Ukraine during the Cold War era, has seen remarkable growth and become more affluent after it joined the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. It is natural for Ukraine to be envious.
Ukrainians see Russia's frequent historical interference in their domestic affairs as a hindrance and believe Ukraine cannot develop economically as long as it is seen only as Russia's younger sibling.
When Putin explained that Russia refused to become subordinate to the United States through the G-8 forum, he perhaps failed to see that by imposing Russian values on Ukraine, it aims to do the same.
War reporting naturally likes to focus mainly on citizens who have suffered and has a tone that implies the states involved must agree to stop fighting to end the dire situation.
Of course, the plight of those on the ground cannot be ignored. But if they end up only making readers and viewers feel pity, the reporting is irresponsible.
Ukrainians currently feel they need to fight hard for the future of their nation, even if they are now victims.
If they continue to be treated as a dependency of Russia, even if a superficial peace existed, real human rights could not be assured and they would be forced into a situation where they cannot determine their own fate.
When images of destroyed buildings, a pregnant woman being carried on a stretcher from a bombed hospital or a sobbing young child are shown, we are likely to think that Ukraine should surrender to end the pain.
But the media should not forget to convey that the victims are fighting and sacrificing so that such a situation will never happen again in the future.
Only when there is well-rounded and comprehensive reporting will consumers of the news be able to think for themselves and make judgments about the war.
The idea of "peace journalism" -- or reporting that does not focus solely on the violence of war -- is gaining support in recent years. I sincerely hope that media coverage will bring peace.
All journalists must remember their reporting is in the service of peace.
However, journalism that fails to convey the motivation of the Ukrainian people's fight and rather argues for surrender and superficial solutions is likely to deliver an empty peace.
We also often hear the term "constructive journalism," which not only reports the facts but also proposes solutions. Given the plethora of problems in the world, constructive journalism sounds attractive, too.
Finding a solution is very difficult for anyone, and what is the right solution anyway, and how can it be achieved? The answers may be developed when each of us thinks for ourselves, makes our own judgments, our voices heard, and takes action even though it is a long process.
I think the media is not a quick-acting remedy but it has an important role to deliver people factual information which will be the foundation of better-informed thoughts and actions.
(Hiroki Sugita is columnist of Kyodo News.)
