LaxPower Back-Up Stick

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:36 pm Mmm, I really do recall you telling us that Ukraine could not hold out, but there was a lot swirling at the time so my recollection could be hazy or incorrect.

BS. You're making sh!t up. Show my words.

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:33 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:22 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 9:34 am

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 9:05 am Yes. afan ignores those aggressive land grabs during the Obama Admin, after Obama sent Nuland & friends to Ukraine in 2014 to foment the Maidan Revolution & regime change which prompted Putin to seize Crimea & the Donbas enclaves, after promising NATO membership.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/america ... -hypocrisy

Translation: I can't refute that A Fan is right, and I"m wrong, so I'm going to move the goalposts to where I always move them: The Dems are bad.

standard afan move -- can't refute the facts so claim the goal posts moved.

How does the above blame change anything?

(it doesn't...outside of you blaming the Dems, this changes NOTHING).

-either sign a treaty with them and drop in US troops so that Putin can't invade, or

-do nothing about Ukraine militarily.

Goalposts firmly in place.

The best part that shows how you are unable to think your way through problems? You've been b*tching about the outcome of arming Ukrainians for months. So CLEARLY you are unhappy with the results. Yet you think we had "no choice" but for Trump and Biden to arm the Ukrainians.

You're now cheering on the bad outcome that you don't like (the Ukraine-Russian war), while telling me that we HAD to do what we did.

Hilarious. Failed the Grad Seminar SO badly.

Because Russia invaded Ukraine & seized the Donbas enclaves & Crimea in 2014 -- before we provided any military aid to Ukraine.

So much for your "arm some guy, & then..." theory. Does your grad seminar have access to a calendar ?

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:28 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:36 pm Mmm, I really do recall you telling us that Ukraine could not hold out, but there was a lot swirling at the time so my recollection could be hazy or incorrect.

BS. You're making sh!t up. Show my words.

Nice response.

I also recall actually quite clearly our discussion of your approving repetition of Putin’s view of history, Russia’s righteous claim that Ukraine is not rightfully an independent country, by language or history.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:37 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:28 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:36 pm Mmm, I really do recall you telling us that Ukraine could not hold out, but there was a lot swirling at the time so my recollection could be hazy or incorrect.

BS. You're making sh!t up. Show my words.

Nice response.

I also recall actually quite clearly our discussion of your approving repetition of Putin’s view of history, Russia’s righteous claim that Ukraine is not rightfully an independent country, by language or history.

I was telling you Putin's rationale, from his perspective, & why it would resonate with the Russian public, as it has.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:48 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:37 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:28 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:36 pm Mmm, I really do recall you telling us that Ukraine could not hold out, but there was a lot swirling at the time so my recollection could be hazy or incorrect.

BS. You're making sh!t up. Show my words.

Nice response.

I also recall actually quite clearly our discussion of your approving repetition of Putin’s view of history, Russia’s righteous claim that Ukraine is not rightfully an independent country, by language or history.

I was telling you Putin's rationale, from his perspective, & why it would resonate with the Russian public, as it has.

And had you limited yourself to that it would have been appreciated, but you defended the false claims and propaganda as if factually based…you did not say that Putin’s claims were BS, you argued in favor of them.

Pretty simple to have made clear if you had thought Putin was making specious claims.

Putin’s puppet lost an internationally recognized election and was out out of office by Zelensky along with his corruption that Trump among others wanted to benefit from. A sample

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/26/politics ... index.html

NATO: https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/10/politics ... src-digvid

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 10:12 am "Stop worrying about a Trump presidency". Seems this guy thinks he is a Trump whisperer.

Ego.

Hard to understand the benefit of making this claim about Trump at this point in time. Does he think that it would give him real political capital with Trump if Trump wins?

He surely can’t be so stupid as to not know the reality that NATO will have full US support and Ukraine will have full US support if Harris wins, but Ukraine definitely won’t if Trump wins and support for NATO will be at best tenuous.

Perhaps because he knows that he can count on Harris but needs to build capital with Trump…but very foolish if he actually believes what he said. And that’s not a good thing for NATO.

OCanada wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:58 am Putin’s puppet lost an internationally recognized election and was out out of office by Zelensky along with his corruption that Trump among others wanted to benefit from. A sample

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/26/politics ... index.html

Worth a re-read.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:56 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:48 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:37 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:28 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:36 pm Mmm, I really do recall you telling us that Ukraine could not hold out, but there was a lot swirling at the time so my recollection could be hazy or incorrect.

BS. You're making sh!t up. Show my words.

Nice response.

I also recall actually quite clearly our discussion of your approving repetition of Putin’s view of history, Russia’s righteous claim that Ukraine is not rightfully an independent country, by language or history.

I was telling you Putin's rationale, from his perspective, & why it would resonate with the Russian public, as it has.

And had you limited yourself to that it would have been appreciated, but you defended the false claims and propaganda as if factually based…you did not say that Putin’s claims were BS, you argued in favor of them.

Pretty simple to have made clear if you had thought Putin was making specious claims.

Since 1999, it has been US foreign policy to expand NATO eastward to contain Russia & to eventually encompass European former Soviet Republics, starting with the Baltic states, continuing to Georgia & then Ukraine. We've interfered in Ukraine's internal affairs since at least 2004.

That has been our consistent foreign policy. Admit it. Embrace it. The EU has been our enthusiastic partner in this venture. Put yourself in the place of a Russian nationalist. It's not that difficult to understand that Putin would react as he has & enjoy public support from his fellow Russians when doing so.

Containment & confrontation is the foreign policy we chose. This was the inevitable outcome from our choices. Go back to celebrating all the Russian soldiers being killed & military equipment being destroyed by our Ukrainian proxies on our behalf, with our funding & our weapons.
Tell us again what a great bargain it is for us. You got the war you craved - now enjoy it.

OCanada wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:58 am Putin’s puppet lost an internationally recognized election and was out out of office by Zelensky along with his corruption that Trump among others wanted to benefit from. A sample

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/26/politics ... index.html

Yanukovych was elected in 2004 & 2010, in the 2010 election, beating Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko in an election that was judged free and fair by international observers.

Poroshenko lost the 2019 election to Zelensky. He was hardly a Putin puppet. He was a leader in the Maidan Revolution, was elected in 2014 & enjoyed US & EU support.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:34 am

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:33 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:22 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 9:34 am

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 9:05 am Yes. afan ignores those aggressive land grabs during the Obama Admin, after Obama sent Nuland & friends to Ukraine in 2014 to foment the Maidan Revolution & regime change which prompted Putin to seize Crimea & the Donbas enclaves, after promising NATO membership.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/america ... -hypocrisy

Translation: I can't refute that A Fan is right, and I"m wrong, so I'm going to move the goalposts to where I always move them: The Dems are bad.

standard afan move -- can't refute the facts so claim the goal posts moved.

How does the above blame change anything?

(it doesn't...outside of you blaming the Dems, this changes NOTHING).

-either sign a treaty with them and drop in US troops so that Putin can't invade, or

-do nothing about Ukraine militarily.

Goalposts firmly in place.

The best part that shows how you are unable to think your way through problems? You've been b*tching about the outcome of arming Ukrainians for months. So CLEARLY you are unhappy with the results. Yet you think we had "no choice" but for Trump and Biden to arm the Ukrainians.

You're now cheering on the bad outcome that you don't like (the Ukraine-Russian war), while telling me that we HAD to do what we did.

Hilarious. Failed the Grad Seminar SO badly.

Because Russia invaded Ukraine & seized the Donbas enclaves & Crimea in 2014 -- before we provided any military aid to Ukraine.

So much for your "arm some guy, & then..." theory. Does your grad seminar have access to a calendar ?

You're an idiot.

Did we have a massive war in Crimea? Nope. Did America blow a bunch of money and arms there? Nope.

That's the outcome I want....no money spent, no blood on our hands, no pointless war for no reason.



What outcome have you been b*tching and whining about for the last year, OS? That's right---an endless, pointless war between Ukraine and Russia. YOU have been complaining about this outcome. YOU, Old Salt. Get it?

Now did we "arm some guy" in Ukraine, or not? That's right. We armed, and are continuing to arm Ukraine....which has led to this expensive, bloody, pointless outcome.

And yet you're on here telling me that "We had no choice" but to arm Ukraine.

Nope. All we had to do is what Bush and Obama did: nothing but economic sanctions. Instead, because Biden listens to military geniuses like you, we chose to arm them. YOUR PATH FAILED, and led to where we are today: in a pointless war. Again. For the bizillionth time.

And what are you advocating now? That we keep arming Taiwan. Same idea. Oh wait...you think that "arming some guy doesn't count" If they pay for the arms. Right. Forgot that brilliant distinction. Like China gives a sh(t as to who pays that tab.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 11:34 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:56 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:48 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:37 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:28 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:36 pm Mmm, I really do recall you telling us that Ukraine could not hold out, but there was a lot swirling at the time so my recollection could be hazy or incorrect.

BS. You're making sh!t up. Show my words.

Nice response.

I also recall actually quite clearly our discussion of your approving repetition of Putin’s view of history, Russia’s righteous claim that Ukraine is not rightfully an independent country, by language or history.

I was telling you Putin's rationale, from his perspective, & why it would resonate with the Russian public, as it has.

And had you limited yourself to that it would have been appreciated, but you defended the false claims and propaganda as if factually based…you did not say that Putin’s claims were BS, you argued in favor of them.

Pretty simple to have made clear if you had thought Putin was making specious claims.

Since 1999, it has been US foreign policy to expand NATO eastward to contain Russia & to eventually encompass European former Soviet Republics, starting with the Baltic states, continuing to Georgia & then Ukraine. We've interfered in Ukraine's internal affairs since at least 2004.

That has been our consistent foreign policy. Admit it. Embrace it. The EU has been our enthusiastic partner in this venture. Put yourself in the place of a Russian nationalist. It's not that difficult to understand that Putin would react as he has & enjoy public support from his fellow Russians when doing so.

Containment & confrontation is the foreign policy we chose. This was the inevitable outcome from our choices. Go back to celebrating all the Russian soldiers being killed & military equipment being destroyed by our Ukrainian proxies on our behalf, with our funding & our weapons.
Tell us again what a great bargain it is for us. You got the war you craved - now enjoy it.

Mmm, I think you mischaracterize US policy and motivations, however that’s consistent with your alignment with “Russian nationalism “.

Our policy has been to encourage democracy and self determination in the former Soviet dominated regions, whether that was Russia itself or its vassal states. We offered acceptance into an international rules based order with all the economic and social benefits of such order. We have long believed that all peoples deserve the opportunity for basic human rights and dignity, including the rights of free expression by minorities.

Of course, that’s not the reality for much of human history but it is the foreign policy aspiration of the US that as many people as possible have such opportunities.

None of this preempts national identity or patriotism.

The dissolution of the Soviet Union offered an opportunity for many to aspire to such freedoms and self determination, as well as economic participation. However, unsurprisingly, there were forces opposing such freedoms and international alignment. In some countries, these forces achieved dominance and in others the struggle took longer to achieve.

Note that Russia was offered this opportunity as well, but unfortunately turned to authoritarian rule again as Putin consolidated power.

You say that the US interfered, but don’t consider Russian corruption and domination to be interference…because you actually buy into Russian propaganda that they have the right to dominate their neighbors, indeed have righteous claims that these countries and peoples owe absolute fealty to Russia.

You seem to agree with Putin that the natural and righteous order looks very much like the Soviet Union or earlier iterations of Russian empire.

And yeah, that’s very different from how Americans have viewed the rights of peoples to be free.

Classic that you blame Putin’s destruction of hundreds of thousands of lives through brutal military aggression on American policy to welcome freedom for all.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 11:34 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:56 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:48 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:37 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:28 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:36 pm Mmm, I really do recall you telling us that Ukraine could not hold out, but there was a lot swirling at the time so my recollection could be hazy or incorrect.

BS. You're making sh!t up. Show my words.

Nice response.

I also recall actually quite clearly our discussion of your approving repetition of Putin’s view of history, Russia’s righteous claim that Ukraine is not rightfully an independent country, by language or history.

I was telling you Putin's rationale, from his perspective, & why it would resonate with the Russian public, as it has.

And had you limited yourself to that it would have been appreciated, but you defended the false claims and propaganda as if factually based…you did not say that Putin’s claims were BS, you argued in favor of them.

Pretty simple to have made clear if you had thought Putin was making specious claims.

Since 1999, it has been US foreign policy to expand NATO eastward to contain Russia & to eventually encompass European former Soviet Republics, starting with the Baltic states, continuing to Georgia & then Ukraine. We've interfered in Ukraine's internal affairs since at least 2004.

That has been our consistent foreign policy. Admit it. Embrace it. The EU has been our enthusiastic partner in this venture. Put yourself in the place of a Russian nationalist. It's not that difficult to understand that Putin would react as he has & enjoy public support from his fellow Russians when doing so.

Containment & confrontation is the foreign policy we chose. This was the inevitable outcome from our choices. Go back to celebrating all the Russian soldiers being killed & military equipment being destroyed by our Ukrainian proxies on our behalf, with our funding & our weapons.
Tell us again what a great bargain it is for us. You got the war you craved - now enjoy it.

All we had to do was trade removing Nukes from Ukraine for a military Treaty with the US....and US Troops defending it...... which would keep Russia from invading all those years ago. What the F would Russia do? Throw a fit?

We did as YOU think we should handle it, OS....half-*ss it. And we're paying the price.

We could have also left the nukes there. But we can't do that because our Foreign Policy is Neo-Con, where we make everything everywhere our problem, and feel the need to stick our nose in it. Just like YOU like it, OS.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 12:30 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 11:34 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:56 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:48 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:37 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:28 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:36 pm Mmm, I really do recall you telling us that Ukraine could not hold out, but there was a lot swirling at the time so my recollection could be hazy or incorrect.

BS. You're making sh!t up. Show my words.

Nice response.

I also recall actually quite clearly our discussion of your approving repetition of Putin’s view of history, Russia’s righteous claim that Ukraine is not rightfully an independent country, by language or history.

I was telling you Putin's rationale, from his perspective, & why it would resonate with the Russian public, as it has.

And had you limited yourself to that it would have been appreciated, but you defended the false claims and propaganda as if factually based…you did not say that Putin’s claims were BS, you argued in favor of them.

Pretty simple to have made clear if you had thought Putin was making specious claims.

Since 1999, it has been US foreign policy to expand NATO eastward to contain Russia & to eventually encompass European former Soviet Republics, starting with the Baltic states, continuing to Georgia & then Ukraine. We've interfered in Ukraine's internal affairs since at least 2004.

That has been our consistent foreign policy. Admit it. Embrace it. The EU has been our enthusiastic partner in this venture. Put yourself in the place of a Russian nationalist. It's not that difficult to understand that Putin would react as he has & enjoy public support from his fellow Russians when doing so.

Containment & confrontation is the foreign policy we chose. This was the inevitable outcome from our choices. Go back to celebrating all the Russian soldiers being killed & military equipment being destroyed by our Ukrainian proxies on our behalf, with our funding & our weapons.
Tell us again what a great bargain it is for us. You got the war you craved - now enjoy it.

All we had to do was trade removing Nukes from Ukraine for a military Treaty with the US....and US Troops defending it...... which would keep Russia from invading all those years ago. What the F would Russia do? Throw a fit?

We did as YOU think we should handle it, OS....half-*ss it. And we're paying the price.

We could have also left the nukes there. But we can't do that because our Foreign Policy is Neo-Con, where we make everything everywhere our problem, and feel the need to stick our nose in it. Just like YOU like it, OS.

afan thinks we should have based US troops in Ukraine since 1994 or encourage Ukraine to keep their nucs (even though they didn't have the codes to arm them). What could go wrong with that ?

In what grad seminar did he learn that ? Good luck getting the US Senate to ratify that Treaty.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:38 pm afan thinks we should have based US troops in Ukraine since 1994 or encourage Ukraine to keep their nucs (even though they didn't have the codes to arm them). What could go wrong with that ?

In what grad seminar did he learn that ? Good luck getting the US Senate to ratify that Treaty.

One where we don't make decisions that lead to the Russian-Ukranian war that you've been complaining about for a year now.

You're NOW telling us you that you're HAPPY with the Russian Ukranian war, and any choices that America could have made in order to avoid the Russian-Ukranian war are stupid or insane.

How the F did you graduate from a military school and NOT be able to figure out how to stay the F out of war that has NOTHING to do with America?

You're telling us that we had no choice but to do all the thing we did to get us to the war. Brilliant.

My choices would have avoided the war. And these are choices you can't argue with...my choices lead to knowable, factually verifiable outcomes.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:56 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:38 pm afan thinks we should have based US troops in Ukraine since 1994 or encourage Ukraine to keep their nucs (even though they didn't have the codes to arm them). What could go wrong with that ?

In what grad seminar did he learn that ? Good luck getting the US Senate to ratify that Treaty.

One where we don't make decisions that lead to the Russian-Ukranian war that you've been complaining about for a year now.

You're NOW telling us you that you're HAPPY with the Russian Ukranian war, and any choices that America could have made in order to avoid the Russian-Ukranian war are stupid or insane.

How the F did you graduate from a military school and NOT be able to figure out how to stay the F out of war that has NOTHING to do with America?

You're telling us that we had no choice but to do all the thing we did to get us to the war. Brilliant.

My choices would have avoided the war. And these are choices you can't argue with...my choices lead to knowable, factually verifiable outcomes.

I'm not happy with the war in Ukraine. It did not have to come to this. The blame is not entirely Putin's. US/EU/NATO expansionist policies were a factor.

Based on our interference in Ukraine's internal affairs for the past 3 decades & our past foreign policy relative to them, now that war has broken out,
I feel we now have an obligation to support them--though I'd prefer we didn't have to. We pushed Ukraine to this point. We made them our proxy in a war to weaken Russia, which we crassly celebrate. This stupid war was not necessary & the fault is not all on Putin.

We can't undo our mistakes (imho) of the past. For that reason, I support defensive military aid to Ukraine, sufficient to allow them to maintain their independence & sovereignty, That does not include regaining all lost former Russian territory or NATO membership. That's why I'm hoping for a Korean style frozen conflict, along the current line of control, asap.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:13 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:56 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:38 pm afan thinks we should have based US troops in Ukraine since 1994 or encourage Ukraine to keep their nucs (even though they didn't have the codes to arm them). What could go wrong with that ?

In what grad seminar did he learn that ? Good luck getting the US Senate to ratify that Treaty.

One where we don't make decisions that lead to the Russian-Ukranian war that you've been complaining about for a year now.

You're NOW telling us you that you're HAPPY with the Russian Ukranian war, and any choices that America could have made in order to avoid the Russian-Ukranian war are stupid or insane.

How the F did you graduate from a military school and NOT be able to figure out how to stay the F out of war that has NOTHING to do with America?

You're telling us that we had no choice but to do all the thing we did to get us to the war. Brilliant.

My choices would have avoided the war. And these are choices you can't argue with...my choices lead to knowable, factually verifiable outcomes.

I'm not happy with the war in Ukraine. It did not have to come to this.

That's right. And that's my point.

And I told you this would be a sh*tshow BEFORE we made these stupid decisions that we keep making over and over and over and over again.

Yet you act like I'm insane for telling you BEFORE we do these things: hey dude, there's a different path in front of us. For the love of G*d, can we PLEASE take this path.

And your response to me is "sorry, we MUST take this path that we KNOW FROM 70+ YEARS OF EXPERIENCE ends badly.

It's batsh(t crazy that won't so much as listen to what I'm telling you for five seconds.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:47 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:13 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:56 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:38 pm afan thinks we should have based US troops in Ukraine since 1994 or encourage Ukraine to keep their nucs (even though they didn't have the codes to arm them). What could go wrong with that ?

In what grad seminar did he learn that ? Good luck getting the US Senate to ratify that Treaty.

One where we don't make decisions that lead to the Russian-Ukranian war that you've been complaining about for a year now.

You're NOW telling us you that you're HAPPY with the Russian Ukranian war, and any choices that America could have made in order to avoid the Russian-Ukranian war are stupid or insane.

How the F did you graduate from a military school and NOT be able to figure out how to stay the F out of war that has NOTHING to do with America?

You're telling us that we had no choice but to do all the thing we did to get us to the war. Brilliant.

My choices would have avoided the war. And these are choices you can't argue with...my choices lead to knowable, factually verifiable outcomes.

I'm not happy with the war in Ukraine. It did not have to come to this.

That's right. And that's my point.

And I told you this would be a sh*tshow BEFORE we made these stupid decisions that we keep making over and over and over and over again.

Yet you act like I'm insane for telling you BEFORE we do these things: hey dude, there's a different path in front of us. For the love of G*d, can we PLEASE take this path.

And your response to me is "sorry, we MUST take this path that we KNOW FROM 70+ YEARS OF EXPERIENCE ends badly.

It's batsh(t crazy that won't so much as listen to what I'm telling you for five seconds.

FTR -- in 2014, I posted Henry K's op-ed on the Finlandization of Ukraine.
That was my hope, starting in 1992.
Looking back - Henry K was prescient.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

How the Ukraine crisis ends
by Henry A. Kissinger, March 5, 2014

Public discussion on Ukraine is all about confrontation. But do we know where we are going? In my life, I have seen four wars begun with great enthusiasm and public support, all of which we did not know how to end and from three of which we withdrew unilaterally. The test of policy is how it ends, not how it begins.

Far too often the Ukrainian issue is posed as a showdown: whether Ukraine joins the East or the West. But if Ukraine is to survive and thrive, it must not be either side’s outpost against the other — it should function as a bridge between them.

Russia must accept that to try to force Ukraine into a satellite status, and thereby move Russia’s borders again, would doom Moscow to repeat its history of self-fulfilling cycles of reciprocal pressures with Europe and the United States.

The West must understand that, to Russia, Ukraine can never be just a foreign country. Russian history began in what was called Kievan-Rus. The Russian religion spread from there. Ukraine has been part of Russia for centuries, and their histories were intertwined before then. Some of the most important battles for Russian freedom, starting with the Battle of Poltava in 1709 , were fought on Ukrainian soil. The Black Sea Fleet — Russia's means of projecting power in the Mediterranean — is based by long-term lease in Sevastopol, in Crimea. Even such famed dissidents as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Joseph Brodsky insisted that Ukraine was an integral part of Russian history and, indeed, of Russia.

The European Union must recognize that its bureaucratic dilatoriness and subordination of the strategic element to domestic politics in negotiating Ukraine’s relationship to Europe contributed to turning a negotiation into a crisis. Foreign policy is the art of establishing priorities.

The Ukrainians are the decisive element. They live in a country with a complex history and a polyglot composition. The Western part was incorporated into the Soviet Union in 1939 , when Stalin and Hitler divided up the spoils. Crimea, 60 percent of whose population is Russian , became part of Ukraine only in 1954 , when Nikita Khrushchev, a Ukrainian by birth, awarded it as part of the 300th-year celebration of a Russian agreement with the Cossacks. The west is largely Catholic; the east largely Russian Orthodox. The west speaks Ukrainian; the east speaks mostly Russian. Any attempt by one wing of Ukraine to dominate the other — as has been the pattern — would lead eventually to civil war or break up. To treat Ukraine as part of an East-West confrontation would scuttle for decades any prospect to bring Russia and the West — especially Russia and Europe — into a cooperative international system.

Ukraine has been independent for only 23 years; it had previously been under some kind of foreign rule since the 14th century. Not surprisingly, its leaders have not learned the art of compromise, even less of historical perspective. The politics of post-independence Ukraine clearly demonstrates that the root of the problem lies in efforts by Ukrainian politicians to impose their will on recalcitrant parts of the country, first by one faction, then by the other. That is the essence of the conflict between Viktor Yanu­kovych and his principal political rival, Yulia Tymo­shenko. They represent the two wings of Ukraine and have not been willing to share power. A wise U.S. policy toward Ukraine would seek a way for the two parts of the country to cooperate with each other. We should seek reconciliation, not the domination of a faction.

Russia and the West, and least of all the various factions in Ukraine, have not acted on this principle. Each has made the situation worse. Russia would not be able to impose a military solution without isolating itself at a time when many of its borders are already precarious. For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one.

Putin should come to realize that, whatever his grievances, a policy of military impositions would produce another Cold War. For its part, the United States needs to avoid treating Russia as an aberrant to be patiently taught rules of conduct established by Washington. Putin is a serious strategist — on the premises of Russian history. Understanding U.S. values and psychology are not his strong suits. Nor has understanding Russian history and psychology been a strong point of U.S. policymakers.

Leaders of all sides should return to examining outcomes, not compete in posturing. Here is my notion of an outcome compatible with the values and security interests of all sides:

1. Ukraine should have the right to choose freely its economic and political associations, including with Europe.

2. Ukraine should not join NATO, a position I took seven years ago, when it last came up.

3. Ukraine should be free to create any government compatible with the expressed will of its people. Wise Ukrainian leaders would then opt for a policy of reconciliation between the various parts of their country. Internationally, they should pursue a posture comparable to that of Finland. That nation leaves no doubt about its fierce independence and cooperates with the West in most fields but carefully avoids institutional hostility toward Russia.

4. It is incompatible with the rules of the existing world order for Russia to annex Crimea. But it should be possible to put Crimea’s relationship to Ukraine on a less fraught basis. To that end, Russia would recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea. Ukraine should reinforce Crimea’s autonomy in elections held in the presence of international observers. The process would include removing any ambiguities about the status of the Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol.

These are principles, not prescriptions. People familiar with the region will know that not all of them will be palatable to all parties. The test is not absolute satisfaction but balanced dissatisfaction. If some solution based on these or comparable elements is not achieved, the drift toward confrontation will accelerate. The time for that will come soon enough.