It is just after 3:30 a.m., and a Ukrainian artillery team’s half-dozen men are asleep in a cramped underground dugout, the dirt walls fortified by logs and the space dimly lit by a single string of green fairy lights.

In the near-darkness, on this southeast corner of the Ukrainian front line, the radio crackles to life.

“They brought us ammunition without telling us,” the awakened radio operator announces.

“At least they are bringing ammo!” says another soldier groggily, in a joking reference to the severe shortage of artillery shells felt just months ago all along Ukraine’s 600-mile front with invading Russian troops.

When the radio crackles again with coordinates of a target, the gunners, from Ukraine’s 148th Separate Artillery Brigade, bolt into action. They dart into the dark trenches outside to get to their gun, an American-supplied M777 howitzer that fires 155 mm shells at the Russian lines.

They roll up the camouflage netting and load and fire one round from the smoke-belching mechanical behemoth, before concealing it again.

Scott Peterson/Getty Images/The Christian Science Monitor

A Ukrainian artillery gunner prepares an explosive charge for 155 mm shells to be fired at Russian positions in eastern Ukraine, July 24, 2024.

Two hours later, lingering Russian drones seeking out their position have departed, and the Ukrainian gunners repeat their moves. They fire 10 rounds in a row, one after another with careful directional adjustments each time, an indication that a Ukrainian drone can see the Russian target and is correcting fire in real time.

“We work when the Russians conduct an assault; we work every day,” says the unit commander who gave the name Ihor, call sign Hellboy, who wears a beard and sideburns beneath a shaved head.

A window for Russia

On this critical corner of the front line, he says, Ukraine has not suffered major territorial losses since the fall of Avdiivka in February, “but the intensity of their [Russian] offensive has a reason.”

That perceived reason is what Russia may see now as a window of opportunity, before Ukrainian lines are further bolstered by an influx of American and European weaponry and ammunition.

Ukraine confirmed a first delivery of long-delayed F-16 jet fighters in recent days, for example, which President Volodymyr Zelenskyy hailed as a “new stage of development” for Ukraine’s air forces.

In June and July, an initiative of the Czech Republic has provided some 100,000 shells – with a total of 500,000 due by the end of the year – a number that Ukrainian officials say has already helped them achieve near-parity now in shell numbers with Russia.

Coming, too, but not yet decisively felt, say Ukrainian officers at several points along the front line, is a colossal $60.84 billion American military aid package, which was delayed for months by Congressional Republicans before passage in late April.

“From March to the middle of spring, we had to save shells,” says Ihor, who gives the rank of “soldier.” “I wouldn’t say it was a crisis, but we had to be precise.” Even now, the explosive charges used to fire the shells can require fine-tuned targeting, because they are supplied by different countries and can be decades old or of varying quality.

“We need something to work with and to fight our enemy,” he says. “We see the effect of that [U.S. and European support] – we get a lot more ammo compared with the spring. … [But] the reality is that we are in defensive positions.”

Russia moves the line

On paper, Russia’s main offensive effort this year – a May push toward Ukraine’s second-largest city, Kharkiv, in the northeast – was stopped after two weeks with few significant Russian gains. In July, President Zelenskyy said some 20,000 Russian soldiers died in those battles, though other estimates have been lower.

Scott Peterson/Getty Images/The Christian Science Monitor

Ukrainian gunners of the 148th Separate Artillery Brigade await targets in a fortified dugout, before firing 155 mm shells from an American-made M777 howitzer at Russian positions.

The British Ministry of Defense recently calculated Russian casualties to number 1,262 per day in May, and 1,162 per day in June – totaling more than 70,000 for the two months and the highest rate since Russian forces invaded Ukraine in February 2022.

But on the map, Russia’s advances in the past month have been steady along the entire eastern front, even if slow. President Zelenskyy said last week that, after the failure of the Kharkiv assault, Russian forces are now “throwing everything they have” to capture Pokrovsk.

“You can feel the shells arriving, you can feel the effect” of the new U.S. and European supplies, says Sgt. Volodymyr Lutsyk, a tank squad commander some 80 miles to the west, on Ukraine’s southern front. His unit – known as Dmytro Kotsiubailo’s 1st Separate Assault Battalion – is made up entirely of what are thought of as “trophy” tanks captured from Russian forces.

“Of course, we would like to make advances, but we need more resources to advance,” says Sergeant Lutsyk, sitting on a pristine Russian T-72 tank – now dug into the ground and heavily camouflaged – captured when a mine blew off one of its tracks.

“There is no point in us sitting around and defending,” he says. “All of us came here to take back our country; we have the spirit to fight. But we can’t just jump on our enemy and fight head-to-head – we need more resources.”

The tank commander notes that Ukraine is “fighting a very serious enemy” and that there is always room for more ammunition, as both sides evolve and improve.

“For a long time we saw the Russians flailing. They have found their own way out of this with ‘glide bombs,’” says Sergeant Lutsyk, referring to heavy Soviet-era “dumb” bombs that Russia updates with wings and guidance systems and launches to devastating effect from deep inside Russian territory.

“This is an advantage, and we don’t have any answer,” he says. “This has its result, and you can see it on the map.”

Not all are optimistic

Indeed, Ukraine’s commander in chief, Oleksandr Syrskyi, acknowledged Aug. 1 that, amid heavy Russian losses, Russian forces had made “slight advances on the front-line.”

That kind of advantage is why optimism is not universal that the influx of more Western weapons and ammunition – including the arrival of F-16s – can turn the tide of the war for Ukraine.

Scott Peterson/Getty Images/The Christian Science Monitor

A Ukrainian artillery team checks the barrel of an American-made M777 howitzer for wear.

“I’m not optimistic,” says one Ukrainian front-line military medic active on the eastern front.

“It’s just my personal opinion. If a miracle doesn’t happen, I don’t think we will be able to win this war in our favor,” says the medic, who could not be further identified. “We are not advancing much, and at the same time we spend a lot of resources, a lot of man power, holding onto the positions that we are holding, with a high price.

“Considering the fact that Russia has installed an industrial-level production of munitions and bombs, and they have an endless amount of people – and we don’t have that amount of people – so it’s just the math,” adds the medic.

“Is it really a huge package? They [the U.S.] promised a lot, but what comes? You never know,” says the medic. “If this really will change the balance and we will have an advantage at some point in weapons, then probably, yes – but I don’t know.”

Compared with that of Russian troops, Ukrainians’ far higher morale – as defenders of their territory and locked in what is often portrayed in Ukraine as an existential fight – “is the only thing keeping us afloat for now.”

Fighting and waiting

Still, Ukrainian soldiers along this eastern front also frequently articulate a determination to fight, regardless of the circumstances – but also await enough Western weaponry to enable their aim of eventually forcing Russian troops out of Ukraine.

A team arrives at the artillery position in the Marinka direction, to use a camera device to inspect the M777 gun barrel for wear and tear. It is worn, but still serviceable.

“So what does that mean – can we not shoot another 2,000 shells with this gun?” asks one of the artillerymen, before adding, tongue in cheek: “Or will someone give us a new barrel?”

The battlefield result will almost certainly depend on what arrives, and how it is used in the fight.

“War is going on, and no one can feel safe,” says Oleksii, call sign Cardinal, a military surgeon at a medical stabilization point run by the 66th Brigade in the Donetsk region.

What about the impact of the American aid package?

“I will only be able to say it is effective when I see the results of that, when there will be no more of our wounded soldiers on these [treatment] tables.”

Oleksandr Naselenko supported reporting for this story.

Kevin Mohatt/Reuters

U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell speaks during a press conference following a two-day meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee on interest rate policy in Washington, July 31, 2024.

In an ideal world, central bankers meet on Mount Olympus, setting policy without regard to the political or market gyrations raging below them. In America, they meet in Washington.

And they meet even in election years.

Political and market pressures are inevitable, especially in a political campaign season in which U.S. monetary policy is nearing an inflection point. Events in the past few days have reinforced just how intense those pressures can be and why, politically and economically, the Federal Reserve is so important.

At a press conference last Wednesday, Fed Chair Jerome Powell strongly suggested that the central bank would finally cut interest rates in September. That’s what Wall Street has been waiting months to hear. Instead of rejoicing, traders appear worried the Fed has fallen behind a cooling economy. They initiated a sharp sell-off that is still reverberating around the world.

Chair Powell also went out of his way to reemphasize the Fed’s political independence. He was perhaps reacting to a recent published interview in which Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for president, said a September rate cut would be a mistake.

“Congress has, we believe, ordered us to conduct our business in a nonpolitical way at all times,” Mr. Powell said. “We never use our tools to support or oppose a political party, a politician, or any political outcome.”

Why stock prices falter: The reason may not be recession

The scrutiny of Fed moves – or even potential moves – is so intense because the Fed is so powerful. Its interest rate decisions help determine the direction of the economy. When the Fed raises interest rates, borrowing becomes more expensive and fewer businesses take out loans to expand. The economy tends to slow. Conversely, when the central bank lowers rates, the economy tends to accelerate.

The current stock swoon has many drivers. One is worry by investors that the immediate benefits of artificial intelligence are overhyped. Another is the recent hike in Japanese interest rates, which hurt Japan’s multinationals and killed a weird trade in which investors borrowed Japanese yen to buy stocks in other countries. But the bigger fear may be that the United States will tip into recession.

For months now, the economy has been showing signs of weakness. Many U.S. companies have reported gloomy outlooks for future sales. On Friday, the Labor Department reported the U.S. added 114,000 jobs in July, only about two-thirds of what many economists had been expecting.

Stock markets, which had already fallen Thursday on artificial intelligence fears and weak earnings reports, plunged. By the end of trading Friday, the tech-heavy Nasdaq composite index had fallen into what Wall Street calls “correction” territory. That means a fall of at least 10% from a recent high and one that marks the halfway point to a bear market. Foreign stock markets also felt the chill. By Monday, Japan’s Topix index had lost 12% of its value over three days, its biggest such plunge since at least 1959.

The losses intensified on all the major U.S. stock indexes Monday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average losing more than 1,000 points, its largest single-day drop in nearly two years.

How much will the Fed cut interest rates?

Not everyone is buying the doom and gloom. “A weak July employment report does not a recession make,” Ed Yardeni and Eric Wallerstein of Yardeni Research Inc., an investment strategy firm, wrote in a Monday note. If things break right, the analysts wrote, they expect stocks to rally after the November election.

“The labor market is cooling, but without a sharp slowdown,” wrote analysts at Bank of America Securities. The jobs report likely looked worse because of Hurricane Beryl’s impact on the Texas labor market last month, they added.

The next question is what the Fed will do at its next meeting in September. Many analysts say the poor labor report guarantees a quarter-point cut in the Fed lending rate that influences wider interest rates. Some say the Fed will cut rates by a more dramatic half a percentage point. 

A rate cut would make borrowing less expensive and help to boost the economy over time. Such a move, so close to the election, would open the Fed to Republican charges that it was tipping the scales in favor of the Democrats. At the same time, the Fed has never been shy about fiddling with interest rates in election years. It has either raised or lowered them in 10 of the last 11 elections. (The exception is 2012, when President Barack Obama was seeking reelection.)

The political fallout from such changes can be dramatic. The Fed reacted too late to pandemic-era inflation, and prices kept soaring. Many voters have not forgiven the administration for the 20% surge in the cost of living since Joe Biden took office.

By cutting rates, the central bank would signal that it has won the fight against inflation and can now turn its attention to boosting the economy. In theory, that could help Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris distance herself from the inflation under President Biden and push the idea that lower mortgage rates and better times lie ahead. The danger is that she could end up trying to sell half a seesaw to voters.

The flip side of a rate cut is that it usually signals a weakening economy, which typically hurts incumbents. Just ask former President Trump. When the pandemic threw millions of Americans out of work in 2020, the Fed scrambled to cut interest rates to counteract a short – but sharp – recession. It buoyed the economy but not in time to help Mr. Trump, who lost the election.

For more than a decade, Venezuelans opposed to the government of President Nicolás Maduro have experienced moments of soaring confidence that change was on the horizon. And just as often, that hope faltered when the government successfully cracked down on protests, meddled with elections, or stamped out popular opposition candidates’ burgeoning power.

But in the lead-up to the July 28 presidential election, hope was higher than ever. And thus, with Mr. Maduro’s baseless claims of victory – which the United States, the European Union, and other governments say they won’t recognize – has come even more crushing disillusionment. A week after the highly contested presidential vote, the population is once again facing a moment of potential change.

The opposition has taken to the streets, with thousands gathering in the capital on Saturday to demand that Mr. Maduro step down. They’re sending a message that they’re unwilling to entertain more of the same governance that has sent Venezuela reeling in recent years amid economic, political, and humanitarian crises.

The government has lashed back, with growing crackdowns and violence against opposition demonstrations. On Sunday, Mr. Maduro urged military chiefs to order a “total deployment” of their troops, and told members of the national guard, “We are confronting, defeating, containing, and pulverizing an attempted coup in Venezuela.”

Fausto Torrealba/Reuters

Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado addresses supporters during a march in Caracas following the disputed July 28 presidential election, Aug. 3, 2024.

Now many Venezuelans are grappling with how to move ahead amid both hope and fear, leaning into the resilience they’ve had to build over the past decade to navigate this fraught moment.

“If change doesn’t happen now, the Venezuelan people’s hope will fall – or relapse as it did in the past,” says Enyerberth Alexander Laguna Rondón, a content manager in his late 20s who participated in the opposition’s pro-democracy march last Thursday.

Protests and repression

The day after the contentious vote and Mr. Maduro’s claims of victory – without any proof – protests erupted across Venezuela. Statues of Hugo Chávez, the popular former president who laid the foundation for Mr. Maduro’s government ideology chavismo, were torn down. The streets were filled with tear gas, gunfire, and flames launched by government sympathizers. Unlike previous protests, which were predominantly led by a politicized middle class, these demonstrations were largely driven by people from low-income neighborhoods that used to be government strongholds. Even parts of Mr. Maduro’s core base have turned against him.

In response, Mr. Maduro unleashed the harshest crackdown of his 11 years in power. At least 22 protesters have been killed over the past week, and the government arrested more than 2,000 people. Just a block from Mr. Rondón’s house, a young man was shot and killed while demonstrating.

“The government uses fear as a means of social control,” says José Gregorio Guerra, a Venezuelan sociologist. It relies on tactics such as raiding the homes of government opponents or their relatives, and encouraging citizens to report criticism of the government.

Fernando Vergara/AP

Police fire tear gas at protesters demonstrating against the government's declaration that President Nicolás Maduro won reelection, Caracas, Venezuela, July 29, 2024.

The strategy has worked. Government repression and intimidation have compelled some protesters like Mr. Rondón to remain at home in recent days. The killing just around the corner from his house left him shaken and overwhelmed. “I don’t want to become a martyr of my country. I would give a lot for my country, Venezuela, but I wouldn’t give my life,” he says with tears in his eyes.

Despite his retreat from the streets, Mr. Rondón admires those who continue to stand up against the government’s fraudulent claims of victory. Mr. Maduro, backed by the loyalist National Electoral Council, announced without detailed breakdowns of the votes or verifiable evidence that he won with 51% of the vote. Opposition candidate Edmundo González Urrutia, a retired diplomat, claimed victory based on the preliminary results of 80% of voting center tallies, collected and protected by over 1 million citizen volunteers. His team claims he won with 67% of the vote.

Carlos Mendoza, a government employee in his early 20s, is among the young Venezuelans still pushing ahead with protests.

As is common among government employees, he says he was pressured by his boss to attend the government’s closing campaign event just over a week ago to show support for Mr. Maduro.

But on Aug. 3, when his boss asked him to attend the government’s election celebration, Mr. Mendoza refused. There could be professional repercussions – no small thing in a nation where the economy is in shambles and hyperinflation distorts purchasing power. But “I cannot abandon Venezuela; I cannot stay at home with my arms crossed,” he says.

Mie Hoejris Dahl

Carlos Mendoza (left) and Enyerberth Alexander Laguna Rondón attend an opposition rally in Caracas days before the July 28 presidential vote. Mr. Rondón has stepped back from street demonstrations after a protester was killed near his home following the contested election.

At the opposition’s rally over the weekend, Mr. Mendoza felt a surge of energy and hope. However, he’s also experienced the harsher side of standing up for democracy. After celebrating Mr. González’s presidential victory on Tuesday, he found himself hiding from tear gas and being chased through streets of Caracas, the capital, by armed forces.

A heavy toll

Nearly all of Venezuelan psychologist Zena Sleiman Dayoub’s patients are experiencing pervasive fear right now, she says. “They feel they are not safe anywhere,” even clients who do not consider themselves politically active, she says.

Years of shortages of basic services and medical and food products, as well as widespread institutionalized violence, feed into the far-reaching anxiety, says Dr. Sleiman. “This is such a [challenging] situation; lots of energy is consumed to process it all,” she says. “It’s more important than ever to take care of ourselves.” 

Mie Hoejris Dahl

A pro-government celebration in central Caracas Aug. 3, 2024, follows President Nicolás Maduro's internationally contested claims of electoral victory.

Now the question Venezuelans – and the world – are asking is whether the South American nation will descend further into dictatorship or move toward a democratic transition, says Dr. Guerra, the sociologist, who for about a decade has run support programs for Venezuelan activists.

The repression “is not enough to stop them,” Dr. Guerra says of Venezuelans tired of years of basic shortages and lack of opportunity.

Holding out hope

But if Mr. Maduro holds on to power, it wouldn’t be the first time Venezuelan hopes for change were dramatically quashed. Widespread political protests in 2014, 2017, and 2019 didn’t yield the results demonstrators hoped for. Nearly 8 million people, representing a quarter of the population, have fled the country due to hunger, political repression, lack of security, and despair.

Many question whether the opposition movement can survive another dramatic disappointment.

Some might abandon the fight. Mr. Rondón, alongside about one-third of Venezuela’s remaining population, is considering leaving the country if Mr. Maduro successfully clings to power. Whether they stay on under Mr. Maduro or migrate, Venezuelans will be dealing with a sense of loss, says Dr. Sleiman, the psychologist.

But, she adds, hope for democracy in Venezuela can’t be crushed entirely. She draws comparisons between the heartache of watching the nation’s promise crumble and that of dealing with an earth-shattering breakup. It’s tempting to reject the idea of falling in love again – or in this case the idea of successfully rebuilding independent institutions and the economy.

But, she says, Venezuelans shouldn’t be afraid to hope and they shouldn’t fear the potential disappointment that comes with having faith that things can change.

“It is a part of living,” she says.

The U.S. track and field delegation’s talent was deep, long before they landed in the City of Light and started racing up the podium. 

Their opening weekend wins came in bronze, silver, and gold. Their stories are of nail-biting firsts and of perseverance. 

Noah Lyles’ performance in the men’s 100-meter sprint Sunday night was the race seen around the world – a cliff-hanger that came down to five-thousandths of a second. By strategically leaning in at the finish, he edged out Kishane Thompson of Jamaica, the favorite to win, and became the first American sprinter to earn gold in the event since 2004. The two medalists had to wait many times longer than it took them to run their race to find out who came first.

Mr. Lyles, a believer in “speaking things into existence,” was not shy about talking ahead of time about his ability to win. 

“It feels good to back it up,” he said at a press conference after achieving his goal, which took all of 9.79 seconds. “I’ve done a lot of work throughout the last three years since 2021,” he added, referring to several physical and mental health setbacks ahead of the Tokyo Olympics, where he qualified to represent the U.S. in the 200-meter event, but not the 100-meter.

The Americans – and others in a mesmerizing field of athletes competing through obstacles including war – delivered must-watch performances throughout the weekend. 

David J. Phillip/AP

Sha'Carri Richardson (left) of the United States, Julien Alfred of Saint Lucia, and Melissa Jefferson of the U.S., run in the women's 100-meter final at the Summer Olympics, Aug. 3, 2024.

On Saturday, Team USA’s Sha’Carri Richardson, who was disqualified from competing in Tokyo because she tested positive for THC, redeemed herself with a silver medal in her signature 100-meter race. Ms. Richardson easily got the loudest applause from the Stade de France crowd during the semifinal and final races – a huge contrast from the online vitriol she faced in 2021. She battled a wet track, finishing behind Julien Alfred, who won the first ever Olympic medal for the Caribbean country of Saint Lucia. American Melissa Jefferson won bronze. 

Watching Ms. Richardson hoisting the American flag around her shoulders with a big smile was a coda for her journey. Instead of shrinking from the battle to get to the Olympics, she worked hard every year since, winning in every competition, to qualify for Paris.

In a weekend of stand-out events, one from Friday night was a highlight for me. American Grant Fisher reached the podium in the men’s 10,000-meter event. His bronze was the first medal for the U.S. in that event since London in 2012 – and the first at these Games for the U.S. in track and field.  For almost 27 minutes (more than 6 miles) he trotted near the front of the line, his stride never allowing him to fall less than sixth in line. He punched his way close to silver before a last minute burst from Berihu Aregawi of Ethiopia finished the race.

Dylan Martinez/Reuters

During the medal ceremony for the men's 10,000-meter race at the Paris Olympics, gold medalist Joshua Cheptegei of Uganda (center) stands with silver medalist Berihu Aregawi of Ethiopia (left) and bronze medalist Grant Fisher of the United States, Aug. 3, 2024.

This event was unique because it kept the attention of fans for almost 30 minutes. They cheered the entire time –  their chants like magnets – intensifying depending on the location of the pack of runners on the field during their 25 laps. I don’t know how the body can do such a thing: work as hard as an automobile, invisible breaths from heaving chest like exhaust pipes. This race, at this length, while keeping his pace, was the perfect example of Mr. Fisher’s perseverance, pushing himself to be the best version of himself until the end.

“I’ve always been on the outside looking in with the medals,” Mr. Fisher reflected after the race. He said he was often told from a young age he wouldn’t be able to compete with competitors from top programs in Africa and Europe. “I hope that I showed that I’m capable of that.”

Everywhere you looked this weekend, though, there were accomplishments. At the same time the final roster in the men’s 100-meter was being decided on Sunday, Ukrainian Yaroloava Mahuchikh was wowing the crowd with her soaring high jumps. With each bar raise, you wondered: Will she make it? She dedicated her gold medal win to those athletes and coaches, nearly 500, who died in her country’s war with Russia. Another Ukrainian, Iryna Gerashchenko, was also on the podium with Ms. Mahuchikh, sharing a bronze medal with Australia’s Eleanor Patterson. 

The day before, on Saturday night in front of a packed crowd and a backdrop of falling rain, Jasmine Moore became the first American woman to win a medal for the women’s triple jump when she secured the bronze. Thea LaFond, who won gold, became the Caribbean island Dominica’s first ever Olympic medalist. 

Kai Pfaffenbach/Reuters

American Ryan Crouser participates in the men's shot put final at the Summer Olympics, Aug. 3, 2024. Mr. Crouser won his third consecutive gold medal in the event.

U.S. shot put champion Ryan Crouser was masterful in his performance. The roaring crowd was his personal soundtrack. Every time his name was mentioned, Mr. Crouser walked to the shot put ring, raised his right hand in the air, placed his shot put against his chalky neck, spun and hurled it. He obliterated the competition on his first toss of 22.64 meters. No one, in six tries, could match it. Meanwhile he threw further the next two times at 22.69 and 22.90. Mr. Couser is so dominant in the sport that he didn’t come close to his Olympic or world records of 23.30 and 23.56 respectively. His competition was fellow American, Joe Kovacs, now a three-time silver medalist, and Rajindra Campbell of Jamaica, who took bronze, and became his nation’s first shot put medalist.

With his six throws, Mr. Crouser wove himself into the history of the event, becoming the first Olympian to ever win three gold medals – a feat he accomplished in three consecutive Olympics.

“Throwing a 16 pound ball as far as you can for a living beats you up,” Mr. Crouser said in a press conference after his win, describing his third win as the best feeling he’s had at an Olympics. “Three golds is a testament to that, to be the first to win three golds.”

But he says he’s not finished yet. Although 2028 is four years away, Mr. Crouser says that he hopes to compete in Los Angeles.“To have the opportunity to hang up my shoes on American soil in a home Olympics would be a dream come true.”

How do athletes cope with the pressure of competition? Find out more: They stepped away for mental health. Their comebacks are powering the Olympics.

Reuters

People in Dhaka, Bangladesh, shake hands with army personnel as they celebrate the resignation of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Aug. 5.

Since 1988, Bangladeshi soldiers have served as United Nations peacekeepers in 43 world trouble spots.  Now, in their home country, they may be applying lessons learned from those assignments – lessons such as empathy, mutual respect, and reconciliation between foes.

On Monday, after Bangladesh’s longtime leader Sheikh Hasina Wazed fled the country following weeks of police crackdowns on protesters, many people are counting on the army to restore full democracy under civilian rule. They want a new government to address the protesters’ main demands: fair government employment and an end to corruption.

“We will not achieve anything else through fighting and violence,” army chief Waker-Uz-Zaman said in a televised address as he announced plans for talks with various political parties to form an interim government.

Will the military be able to quickly guide the country back to a healthy democracy? From 1975 to 2011, Bangladesh endured 29 successful or attempted coups. It is unclear to what extent, if any, the army may share responsibility alongside the police for the violent repression of civilians. In a meeting with General Zaman on Friday night, the BBC reported, junior officers expressed concern that imposing a curfew might require them to fire on civilians. The next day, military leaders openly defended the right of citizens to protest.

That stance may have roots in a military ethic shaped more by the force of reason than by bullets. A four-star general with a master’s degree from King’s College in London and a reputation for integrity, Mr. Zaman assured Bangladeshis that “all killings, all injustices” will be “examined.” His promise of transparency reflects a key lesson in rebuilding societies torn by conflict. As a U.N. peacekeeper in Liberia, General Zaman observed the role that truth-telling played in the West African country’s search for reconciliation after a brutal civil war.

“Please keep up your trust in the army,” he asked in his afternoon address. “We will restore peace to the country.”

Fortified with the news of Sheikh Hasina’s abdication, Bangladeshis greeted soldiers in the streets with joy. Their sense of relief and possibility reflects a key lesson from U.N. peace missions. As Paul Williams of George Washington University wrote for The Africa Center for Strategic Studies, “Peacekeepers are never in total control of their legitimacy because it depends on the perceptions of other actors.”

An army conditioned by decades of peacekeeping has so far won the goodwill of the citizens it serves. “As a nation we have a new moral stance and we will make the best of it,” Sayem Faruk, an entrepreneur in Dhaka, the capital, told The Financial Times. “We won’t let politicians like these take over again.” Now, the renewal of stability depends on keeping the people’s confidence through equality and honest governance.