Miles Copeland, III

The official website

US TV shows give a lot of coverage to Ukraine even as the disclosures of the June 6th committee keep coming. Some commentators mention the idea of an eventual negotiation. I heard several say “every war ends in negotiation”. Funny, I must have missed those. World War 2 did not end in a negotiation. What political leader could face his people after “negotiation” with Hitler or the WW2 leaders of Japan. A negotiation by its definition means that both sides of an issue gain some and loose some. What would the Allies agree to give Hitler? No, World War 2 ended in unconditional surrender. Perhaps we can point to the wars in Yugoslavia after its break up. Not much cause for celebration or a real resolution. The reality is that Putin embarked on the flawed idea that Ukraine would crumble quickly before the West really woke up to deal with it. It was a strategy of a fait accompli. Many in the West would have agreed with him. Both misjudged what had been going on in Ukraine for some time and they certainly did not count on President Zelensky. As a result Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will go down as perhaps the greatest military/political blunder in history. What’s worse is that Putin was so convinced in his view that he did not give the slightest attention to an exit strategy should he fail in any way. He is stuck with a policy with no wriggle room. Negotiation cannot take place for him unless it is within his terms. Zelensky is facing the same reality. He cannot negotiate with someone who has killed so many of his people and destroyed indiscriminately his cities and infrastructure. How would any people agree to such a negotiation? What would they think of any leader who agreed to such a negotiation? Zelensky is right. Negotiation ONLY after ALL Russian troops leave all parts of Ukraine. Then, WHO is going to pay for rebuilding Ukraine after such massive destruction? Can anyone imagine a scenario where Ukraine agrees to let Russia keep the territory it now occupies or even a part of it and NOT demand money needed for reconstruction? Can one imagine Putin agreeing to pay for such reconstruction and still retain power? What about the war crimes? Can the world just forget them? There is also talk here in the USA about a Republican view (a minority to be sure) that might put the brakes on full US support for Ukraine. The problem is that once the Republicans control the House they too will face the consequences of their decisions. Its one thing to attack when you dont have to deal with any of the consequences. Its another when you have to accept some of the blame for an attack. The Republicans will have no option but to continue support without a hitch. Just like Putin being stuck, the Republicans too are stuck having taken positions that will not allow them to change US foreign policy. They point to giving a message of weakness to the Russians like the US departure from Afghanistan. What message would it be to withdraw support from Ukraine? What message would it be to China in its quest for Taiwan? How would all those Republican donners within the defense establishment think of a reduction on arms expenditure? AND would all the money being spent re Ukraine really be spent in the US? Would the Republicans really want to be stuck saying the money should be spent on programs, social or infrastructure in the US? They have resisted such spending in the past and dont want to be called on putting their money where their mouth is. Lets also not forget that Zelensky and Ukraine have gained great support within the body politique of the US and indeed within Western Europe. Unlike Putin and the Russian Army. Combined with Trump and his allies loosing ground, it would not be wise for Republican politicians who want to get elected in 2024 to oppose continued support. After all, the Ukrainians are white and Christian and look just like the people so much of the Republican base is made up of. Then there are the Russian people themselves. Do they really want to go back to the isolation of the Soviet Union or the rule of an autocratic leader who can do anything he wants to anyone he wants? As the Iranian regime is learning, the younger generation of the internet and social media, have changed the game. Putin is an anachronism as are his ideas. All leaders, everywhere best learn that. The only out for the Russians I can see is the assignation of Putin and the Russian people laying all the blame on that one man. Negotiation? cant see how that can happen. Anyone imagining that is in the cards is dreaming.

%d bloggers like this: