Posted on 05/11/2022 4:26:47 AM PDT by Kaslin
A negotiated end to the war in Ukraine is imperative, and the sooner the better. However, it will require Ukraine to make certain concessions to the warmongers who invaded their country. Doing so will be a bitter pill for Ukraine to swallow. These concessions are mostly symbolic. It will be distasteful, and morally unsatisfying. But prolonging the war in the hope of a decisive victory over Russia is a strategy fraught with peril and has few if any benefits.
There is no guarantee Ukraine can defeat Russia, and losing on the battlefield will undermine Ukraine’s position. Plus, victory promises scant tangible rewards. Crimea and Donbass will not be recovered. And while the odds of a NATO-Russia war are slim, the potential consequences are terrifying. This war has to stop, with a negotiated settlement, before it spirals out of control, and before more people die needlessly.
It is impossible not to greatly admire Ukraine’s heroic resistance to unprovoked Russian aggression. But the United States has no vital national security interest truly at stake in Ukraine. Ukraine is not a treaty ally of the United States. We have no responsibility to defend Ukraine, and there is no loss of credibility if we do not.
I am skeptical Ukraine can win. They’ve put up a heroic fight so far, absolutely inspiring. But favor is usually on the side of the big battalions. Putin has staked his prestige and political survival on some sort of victory. Starting this war was a huge strategic mistake for Putin. Having begun a war, however, he can’t face the disgrace of defeat.
And there is a real risk of a nuclear World War III. Maybe Russian rhetoric about nuclear war is just empty saber rattling. However, I have had Duma members tell me they would be willing to die in a nuclear war, if it also meant the destruction of the United States.
So, what does Putin want? His core demands are that Ukraine adopt a constitutional amendment to remain neutral in perpetuity, that Ukraine recognize Russia’s (illegal) annexation of Crimea, and also recognize the so-called people’s republics of Donetsk and Luhansk as independent.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy should accede to these demands. Ukraine was unlikely to join the alliance anytime in the foreseeable future. Likewise, there is no prospect of Ukraine recovering Crimea or the Donbass. Agreeing to these demands, Zelenskyy surrenders nothing that is not already lost.
It would be difficult for the Ukrainians to agree to these terms. But it might be better to accept Putin’s minimalist program while such an agreement can be reached than risk military setbacks and Putin’s imposition of his maximalist objectives. These aims may include annexation of Ukraine’s entire Black Sea coast, including the major cities of Odessa, Mykolaiv, and Kherson, as well as the demilitarization of Ukraine.
And what’s the alternative? Maybe with continuing arms supplies, Ukraine can stay in the fight indefinitely. But to what purpose? I see few possibilities for a decisive Ukrainian military victory, only to maybe halt further Russian military advances. There will be no reconquest of Crimea and Donbass.
And let’s dispense with pieties about “a global struggle between democracy and autocracy.” Let's also set aside daydreams of a coup in Moscow. This is a moment to confront hard choices and draw rational conclusions.
It’s a lousy situation, and just like you, I’d love to see Vladimir Putin go down. But as much as that might be emotionally satisfying, it doesn’t resolve the very real dilemma Ukraine faces. Every day this war drags on, people will keep dying. Continuing the war and staying the course offers a) very scant possibilities of genuine gains, and b) runs very real risks of much worse outcomes, even global disaster. What I propose here is perhaps hard to stomach. Nobody much enjoys giving in to bullies or gangsters. But are we really, really willing to die for Kramatorsk?
And what does America really stand to gain from more war on Ukrainian soil? For Washington, the bloodier the war, the more Russia suffers militarily. That is not an unreasonable desire. But it is the Ukrainians who will die to achieve it. A negotiated peace now stops the war. It puts an end to the bombings and shelling of Ukrainian cities and the deaths of Ukrainian civilians and soldiers. Bad peace, in this case, really is preferable to a good war.
How about a different plan? Ukraine wins, Russia loses.
Looking at the situation on the ground that plan is closer to reality.
Western imperialism, which pays a price for nothing, wins. America is paying a huge price every day. And it is an utter distraction from all of our domestic issues - our economy - and our real strategic issue - China.
It's the wrong war in the wrong place for the wrong reason run by the wrong people.
Leave it up to the Ukrainians. Ukrainians seem to be determined to rid the Russians from their land.
“It’s the wrong war in the wrong place for the wrong reason run by the wrong people.”
That is a perfect summary.
I was surprised to see a story yesterday on one of the local TV stations about “What is an EMP? and what does it do?” Interviews on the street showed complete ignorance on the topic.
Something is up.
Russia can probably bring two million tons of explosive force to the Ukrainian battlefields annually.
That is 100 Hiroshima bombs worth of explosive force.
The Ukrainians can’t make or transport across their country a comparable amount of explosive force.
Hitler leveled Rotterdam in 1940 with far, far less explosive force.
Another surrender monkey speaks....
The author ignores the social and political cost of the war in Russia. It also ignores the impact that a unified West has had on life in Russia with sanctions that have mushroomed far beyond what the governments alone could have imposed. Corporations like Schlumberger, Shell and others have withdrawn their technical support. Without these companies Russia can’t maintain its oil output. The Russian country and state have been limping along without developing the level of expertise required to keep their infrastructure going without foreign help. Therefore, Putin is not on a firm footing at home, and we could see the Russian federation...fifteen fractious countries...collapse inward long before there is a decision on the Ukrainian battlefield. The longer Ukraine can hold out the better will be any final solution to the conflict. It’s not Ukraine’s job to win the war. Its job is simply not to lose it.
There is nothing wrong with that, is there? Just imagine if some country would invade us.
Lol, Mark Nuckols, blink if this was written under duress.
Russia isn't going to be defeated.
They will do whatever it takes to win.
That's the problem.
And our military support of Ukraine is increasing that outcome.
When Russia decides the only way to win is to go nuclear, how do we respond?
Going to annihilate civilization over Ukraine?
Russia has yet to up the ante. They have not destroyed Ukraine’s electrical grid, water supplies, bridges, railway system, airports, etc. Ukraine cannot carry out a prolonged war if Russia decides to systematically destroy the country’s infrastructure. And it can do that from inside the sanctuary of Russia’s borders.
The US did something similar to Serbia, including the use of EMP weapons. Agree with the author that a negotiated settlement ASAP is the best solution. A return to the status quo ante bellum is the best that be hoped for.
The problem is that Ukraine seems to be a vital financial interest of the globalist corruptocrats running up against a vital national security issue for the Russians, and an issue that most Americans, if they understood it would say, meh, not our circus.
But a good part of our deep state is with the global corruptocrats and against America. Linda is the public face of this Orwellian nightmare.
“it is the Ukrainians who will die to achieve it”
Let them decide if & when it’s time to concede
The Soviet Union was twice as big as Russia. They lost to Afghanistan and collapsed.
You bring up a great point, Why haven’t the Russians attacked Infrastructure? That should have been the first to go. Then wait 10-14 days BEFORE invading. Something is odd
Satiating the invaders with a land prize will only invite more aggression later. Let Russia bleed through an insurgency.
They'll be bled dry through a protracted insurgency and sent back across their border just as more-powerful then-Soviets were in Afghanistan.
If I am in the business of producing cars and my biggest customers are imposing idiotic policies that force themselves to walk everywhere they travel, you can be sure I’m going to start looking elsewhere for new customers. This is basically what the “green energy” nonsense of the West has brought us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.