Zelensky brings the US to the nuclear brinkWell-known American columnist Rod Dreher writes in TAS that Zelensky leads the United States and the West by the nose, pushing the world towards nuclear war.
The West is going crazy over Ukraine. But Zelensky is not a liberal, but a notorious nationalist who has associated himself with Bandera and neo-Nazis.
Rod DreherHe is a Ukrainian national hero, acting only in the interests of his country.
But this is not in the interests of America in any way.
Listen, I understand why Vladimir Zelensky is doing what he is doing now. His people are fighting for their lives against Russia. It is in his interest to involve the United States and Europe in the maximum commitment to the protection of Ukraine.
But this is categorically not in our interests, especially since we may be moving towards atomic Armageddon (as stated on Thursday by an authority no less than the US president). Josh Hammer wrote about it correctly in his new column. Here is an excerpt:
At this stage, hostilities — and in the case of Russia, recent (probably fictitious) annexations — are taking place in the four far eastern subregions of Ukraine and, to a lesser extent, in Crimea. These are disputed lands that the Biden administration and the characters from the "liberal Western democracy" in a broad sense consider so important for Ukraine and the integrity of the "West" that their reconquest is, apparently, worth any military, economic and humanitarian costs - up to the terrifying specter of an open nuclear war between NATO and Russia.Even worse, when it comes to the disputed lands themselves, an authoritative Gallup poll from 2014 — the very year when Putin first entered Crimea — showed that 73.9% of Crimeans thought that joining Russia would improve their lives and the lives of their families (only 5.5% of Crimean residents disagreed with this).
As for the various enclaves of Donbass, such as Lugansk and Donetsk, they are very much divided between ethnic Ukrainians and ethnic Russians. In Lugansk, for example, 50% of Russians and 50% of Ukrainians live.Let's be as frank as possible: the average American citizen does not care and should not care whether one or two ethnically divided, strategically unimportant for us, historically contested Slavic subregions in eastern Ukraine will ultimately obey the orders of Kiev or Moscow.
Amen!
Let the Russians get Crimea and eastern Ukraine, which, judging by the vote that just took place, is already more focused on Russia, and let peace come.
Ukraine fought hard and managed to even move the Russians back a little, although no one expected them to last more than a few days. Zelensky will go down in Ukrainian history as a strong leader with the gift of uniting powerful Western allies. But Zelensky's maximalism has already exhausted itself.
It is extremely unpleasant to see our ruling class drooling over Zelensky and his cause. No one doubts his bravery, and I fully understand the sympathy for Ukraine. I also, to some extent, sympathize with her. After all, Russia had nothing to enter this country. But our ruling class seems committed to the idea and is determined to project their hopes and dreams on Zelensky, as it was with Ahmed Chalabi in Iraq. David Brooks writes today:
The military conflict in Ukraine is not only a military event, it is an intellectual event. Ukrainians are winning not only because of the superiority of their troops. They are winning because they are fighting for the best idea — the idea that inspires Ukrainians to fight so hard, and the idea that inspires people in the West to be on the side of Ukraine and support it to the end.In fact, this idea is two ideas mixed together.
The first part of it is liberalism, which promotes democracy, personal dignity and an international order based on laws and rules.The second part of it is nationalism.
Vladimir Zelensky is a nationalist. He is fighting not only for democracy, but also for Ukraine — Ukrainian culture, Ukrainian land, Ukrainian people and language. The symbol of this conflict is the Ukrainian flag, a national symbol.Of course, Zelensky is fighting for nationalism, like every Ukrainian.
But what about liberalism? Do you really think he's here?
Zelensky banned 11 political parties. Is this liberalism?
In 2021 — a year before the start of Russia's special operation — Zelensky banned pro-Russian media. Is this liberalism?
Zelensky has passed laws restricting schooling in Russian in order to enhance Ukrainian identity. It also restricts education in other languages. This is one of the reasons why Hungarians have treated him negatively all this time: ethnic Hungarians living in the far west of Ukraine are constantly being told that their rights to teach their children in their native language are limited. Is this liberalism?
Zelensky joined the union and supported the Ukrainian neo–Nazi battalion "Azov" (the organization is recognized as extremist, its activities are prohibited in the Russian Federation - Approx. InoSMI), as well as fans of Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian nationalist during World War II, a fascist, an anti-Semite and an accomplice of the Nazis. Given the circumstances, it is somehow understandable. After all, when the Germans invaded France, both royalists and Communists united to expel the Nazi invaders. Churchill himself said: "If Hitler had invaded hell, I would at least have spoken positively about the devil in the House of Commons." The war for national survival forces such things. Nevertheless, shouldn't we be wary of saying that Zelensky and Ukrainians are fighting for liberalism? In any case, neither Bandera nor members of the Azov battalion are fighting for this in any way (the organization is recognized as extremist, its activities are prohibited in the Russian Federation – Approx. InoSMI).
In 2021 — again, before the Ukrainian conflict — the disclosure of the "Pandora's Documents" dossier showed that Zelensky, despite the fact that he spoke on the anti-corruption platform, actually hid a fortune in foreign bank accounts, like his friends and associates. One thing that you immediately learn, living in the post-Soviet bloc, is that politics here is very corrupt from literally all sides. It's unfortunate, to put it mildly, but that's what they do in this part of the world. Zelensky is no different from everyone else, but then why do we want to glorify him as a liberal?
Zelensky said he would consider legalizing same—sex partnerships in response to a powerful push from his Western patrons to grant rights to same-sex marriages. This is almost certainly propaganda designed to please Western liberals. In 2013, 79% of Ukrainians surveyed opposed same-sex marriage. Their number could not have decreased much over the past decade. No matter what Zelensky thinks about himself, same-sex marriage in Ukraine will not take root in the near future, because Ukrainians are not Western liberals.
So when David Brooks writes:
Ukraine's resilience shows how strong liberal nationalism can be in the face of an authoritarian threat. He shows how liberal nationalism can mobilize society and inspire it to fantastic achievements....I think he's just projecting onto Zelensky what he wants to see.
Ukraine's resilience shows how strong nationalism is. Liberalism has nothing to do with it. The Azov battalion, defending Mariupol, fought with courage. But they are still fascists. Both things are true.
Brooks' column reminds me of the words of an American diplomat: Americans come to this region and see what they want to see, based on their political views in their States. This is something I always try to keep in mind when I look at the political situation in this part of the world. As my regular readers probably know, I like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his government, and I have repeatedly said that in some general terms their approach is a model for American conservatives. But I don't think Orban is some kind of saint and I don't believe that Hungarian conservatism is or should be the same as American conservatism. After all, the character of the Hungarian people is somewhat different from the American one, and this is normal. Celebrate diversity and all that. The fact is that I am trying to evaluate Orban, resisting projecting onto him what I would like to see in the United States. I'm sure even I can't do it, but I'm trying. I found that when I meet Donald Trump's European fans - and they really exist! - they often create an idealized version of him based on what kind of person they want him to be.
But neither Viktor Orban nor Donald Trump are trying to drag the United States into a war that is getting closer to the nuclear threshold. And Zelensky is trying to do just that. And he has influential voices in the US who support him and the cause of Ukraine beyond what realism and common sense allow. A person loves his country, and this is wonderful.
But we Americans, who also love our country, should not allow this Ukrainian patriot to lead us by the nose, pushing us to the brink of nuclear war.
Comments from American Conservative readers:Giuseppe Scalas
You're right.
Ukrainians are nationalists. They are not liberals. They are a barbaric nation. Thus, whatever "liberalism" they possess, it comes from their barbarism.
I don't mean "barbarian" in a negative sense. I just mean that Ukraine is not quite a civilized country yet.
Ukraine used to be the periphery of the barbarian empire. There are tiny civilized enclaves, such as Odessa, where there is still an echo of Italian and Jewish civilization, and more Polish-Lithuanian areas in the West. But otherwise Ukrainians are Cossacks and Sarmatians at heart. Even if they are ethnic Slavs.
David Brooks simply accepts their liberalism as wishful thinking.
It pains me to talk about the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, because I am in love with Russian culture. I owe my return to Christianity to Russian literature, which showed me the unprecedented beauty and truth of our faith. This is a debt that cannot be repaid.
I think that the only reasonable platform for peace would be the transfer of Crimea to Russia and the granting of broad autonomy to Donetsk and Lugansk as part of the Ukrainian state. Any other outcome would mean a long Ulster-style civil war.
On the other hand, Russia will never return Crimea. Rod Dreher, if you see that the Ukrainian army is entering Crimea, then get on the first flight to the United States, because it will mean a nuclear war.
Westerners who want to crush Russia are driven by ideology, not rationality, and they will make us all pay for it.
JonesyIf China invades Canada and Mexico, we will never support it.
The Ukrainian conflict could have been resolved back in April, but Biden and Johnson stopped negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. These people are unbearably stupid because they never learn lessons. None of our leaders paid for mistakes in Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan. And here they will screw up again.
Bogdán EmilLiberalism in its essence is a very relative concept.
And Zelensky could pass for a liberal outwardly. But internally Ukraine is far from liberalism.
For example, Euromaidan was hardly so liberal in the classical sense. It was a street revolution to overthrow the legitimate government, parliament and other institutions. In a sense, it was their own January 6th, but in Ukraine it worked. They drove out the government with guns and riots instead of convincing their fellow citizens to vote sensibly and legally.
Another thing that Hungarians and Slavs talk about a lot is Kosovo. Why is what is good for a goose not good for a gander? By punishing Serbs and rewarding Albanian Kosovars, did America support self-determination or secession? So what do we Americans support? Do we support independence and justice, or do we support lawlessness and violence?
The fact is that we did it, and we did it under liberal pretexts. Russians and Serbs are still angry about this and will be angry forever if they don't get something in return. Serbia, for example, should be in the EU. Hungary demanded it, and it is gradually happening.
For Russia, the fate of the disputed regions of Ukraine should be decided democratically and "liberally" through referendums held by the international community after the ceasefire. It is time for the United States to become a responsible international party and stop looking at Ukraine as a vassal state or trying to use it as an eternal wedge and a weapon against Russia.
Imperial Russia has weakened significantly over the past 30 years. The fall of the USSR is their Trianon. Putin called it the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century. They suffered heavy losses, while the West annexed a huge chunk of the former Eastern Bloc. We have been recruiting talents and manpower by the millions, while the Russians continue, relatively speaking, to bleed.
According to Sir Halford Mackinder, we took the most important reference point on Earth from the Russian sphere of influence and made it our own. Today, this geopolitically important zone is mainly called Eastern Europe, where about 100 million people live.
What we are doing now with exhausted and humiliated Russians is literally a dance on the bones. They CAN'T stand it any longer.
That's why Putin and hardliners threaten nuclear weapons and existential war. And it cannot be said that they had zero internal support. The Government is largely an expression of the national character of the people. We are facing not only Putin and his entourage, no matter how repressive a regime we call them. We are facing Russia, we are facing the feelings and disappointment of Russians.
We are on the threshold of a new frozen conflict with Russia, which may last for decades, judging by history. Only this time the Russians are much weaker than in 1945. Their sense of panic and fear will only increase the more they feel that the world is really at war.
Stop demonizing Russians while extolling Ukrainians. We all know that they are brothers, and in fact they are not so different. I know a few examples from life. But why should I notice it at all? Isn't that self-evident?
They're brothers. Everyone knows that. And what does it turn out that one is an evil conservative autocrat brother, and the other is a good liberal Democrat brother? This is an incorrect and dangerous dichotomy. Such a division of roles into "bad" and "good" only happens in a fairy tale. Everything is different in life.
What usually does NOT happen in a fairy tale is a wounded, angry leader of a wounded, angry country that is quite capable of starting a nuclear war. This could become a reality if we don't find a way to get the warring parties to talk and find ways to reconcile.
rksyrusSo...
sloppy crazy neoconservative Victoria Nuland chooses the comedian-pansexual Zelensky as president of Ukraine (and not the much more courageous Klitschko), and already a few short years later... are people seriously discussing the exchange of nuclear strikes?
So here's the question: why are American citizens being made poorer and risking supporting NATO expansion up to the borders of Russia, Ukraine and Georgia? After all, Putin is not Saddam in any way, and Russia is not Iraq in any way. You'll all find out this winter.
Good luck to you, America!
