NATO’s false promises are encouraging misplaced Ukrainian hopes

POLITICO ^ | July 18, 2024 | Christopher McCallion and Benjamin H. Friedman

[McGruff]

At the 2024 NATO Summit in Washington, commemorating the alliance’s 75th anniversary, leaders offered Ukraine a fresh round of false hope in its war against Russia — which is worse than doing nothing.

Whether by military commitment or intensified support, the pretension that NATO could currently deliver a Ukrainian victory, or secure one later, encourages the country’s leaders to postpone reckoning with their dire circumstances. Moreover, it threatens to further imperil NATO members without a security payoff.

After the failure of Ukraine’s counteroffensive in 2023, recognition that its forces cannot regain more of its territory has begun to sink in. Indeed, despite the flow of heavy Western aid, Kyiv may struggle to hold what it has — a circumstance that suggests it should start exploring negotiations with Moscow to end or even freeze the conflict via an armistice now, before the battlefield situation worsens and negotiating room shrinks.

---

TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Ukraine; War
KEYWORDS: benjaminhfriedman; bidenswar; christophermccallion; coveringforbiden; escalation; killkillkillforpeace; mic; politico; pollutico; ukraine; welfarewar; worldwariii; ww3

[McGruff]

Christopher McCallion is a fellow and Benjamin H. Friedman is policy director at Defense Priorities.

[TStro]

The Deep State must keep the war going to line their pockets.
We were warned about the military industrial complex after WWII.
Time to dismantle it.

[Who is John Galt?]

[nopardons]

BTTT

[mac_truck]

The West is too busy committing economic and cultural suicide to defend Ukraine directly.

[adorno]

Whether by military commitment or intensified support, the pretension that NATO could currently deliver a Ukrainian victory, or secure one later, encourages the country’s leaders to postpone reckoning with their dire circumstances. Moreover, it threatens to further imperil NATO members without a security payoff.

One must remember that, the above piece is OPINION and not FACT. One must also remember that the war is ongoing and has been on for 2 1/2 years, and that it will likely last a lot longer. Meaning that, even Russia will find that its losses are too much to bear. Both sides are losing, and both sides are winning. Russia brought in their massive forces, and Ukraine only had the forces of a minor military. Yet, Ukraine has been able to make a fight of it, and Russia is increasingly frustrated. Russia is counting on opinion pieces such as the above, to help them out.

[Harpotoo]

The only way the ukes can keep what they currently have is by direct involvement by nato and the US under fjb and that my friend is ww3.

[BlackbirdSST]

One must remember that, the above piece is OPINION and not FACT.

Replacing one opinion with your own produces no facts. That's a fact.

[McGruff]

Someone posed the question recently. “What is the path to victory in Ukraine?” I haven’t heard a good answer yet.

[adorno]

Someone posed the question recently. “What is the path to victory in Ukraine?” I haven’t heard a good answer yet.

Sometimes, the only option is to not allow a victory by the enemy. Wearing down the enemy can lead to victory or a withdrawal. It happened in Afghanistan and Russia pulled out. It happened in Afghanistan and the U.S. pulled out. It's happened often in history in many places. Russia cannot win the war if the resistance is long-lasting or forever.

[adorno]

Replacing one opinion with your own produces no facts. That's a fact.

You just expressed an opinion which can be fact or not. Try an opinion which is useful.

[adorno]

The only way the ukes can keep what they currently have is by direct involvement by nato and the US under fjb and that my friend is ww3.

Uuugggghhhhh!!!!

The threat of WW3. How original. Can't you come up with something different? Putin says the same thing all the time. Now you are picking up on it.

Doint the right thing can be risky. The U.S and Europe came to that reality when WW2 happened, and if we don't come to that reality now, WW3 would be a one-way war with Russia and China getting their way. Threats can be both ways, and nobody wants WW3, especially when certain countries like Russia are ill-equipped to engage in one. Russia would be the biggest loser in such a war and might even result in Russia ceasing to exist altogether. You think they want that?

[BobL]

“NATO’s false promises are encouraging misplaced Ukrainian hopes”

My first thought was these people are ABSOLUTE IDIOTS as they feed directly into Putin’s (true) claims that NATO wants to surround and threaten Russia. After all, why keep helping Putin strengthen his position in Russia, and also help him expand the size of Russia?

Now I realize that they are ABSOLUTE IDIOTS, because they’re unable to comprehend the above. All they are concerned with is getting through the November Election with as little talk of Ukraine as possible as that only helps Trump, and even with the continuous Russian gains, they are getting closer to that objective on a daily basis.

After the election, regardless of who wins, they get with Putin and give him what he wants, as the need for dragging out the war will have ended. I draw that conclusion based on the fact that the Neocons never wanted the war in the first place (otherwise they would have at somewhat prepared for it, and they didn’t), instead they figured their ‘sanctions’ was their fail-safe if Putin got serious about Ukraine, and went in - the ‘sanctions’ would bring Russia to it’s knees and they’d sue for peace. Whoops!

[Jim Robinson]

Were they gonna get the troops? EU? USA?

[Widget Jr]

"After the failure of Ukraine's counteroffensive in 2023, recognition that its forces cannot regain more of its territory has begun to sink in."

The other side of this is, all the Russian failures since the war began are sinking in too, with notable exceptions for Putin and the Russian military.

Despite all the talk of all the experts analyzing every minute detail, there are overall facts that remains. Despite Ukraine losing the supposedly strategic Bakhmut and Avdiivka, the Russian army has completely failed to capitalize on these gains. For the last 18 months Russia has gained at most 100 square miles at a far higher cost than Ukraine. 100 square miles in a country the size of Alaska isn't much.

If Putin was a smart and Russia as capable as all these experts claim, then Russia would have won a few days after the invasion started.

[adorno]

Were they gonna get the troops? EU? USA?

You mean, 'where'?

But, the troops are/were always there, and the 'troops' have already been helping Ukraine to hold-off the Russians. How else do you think that Russia is having such a hard time? Officially, the EU and US troops are not there, and if they had to be there 'full force', Russia would be done for.

[Harpotoo]

Russia prcs nk iran are on our side lol

[Sirius Lee]

One must remember that, the above piece is OPINION and not FACT.

Yet you then go on with assertions that are, themselves, just opinions. But, hey, we still have a 1st Amendment here in the United States of America First.

[adorno]

Russia prcs nk iran are on our side lol

Can you write that in English? I don't understand Martian.

[adorno]

Yet you then go on with assertions that are, themselves, just opinions.

Well, there you go, doubling-down on my assertion that opinions are just opinions and not worth much. My opinions are just opinions, just like the opinions of the op-ed writers are just opinions. Opinions are not statement of fact, and the op-ed just contained opinions.