National Review: Here are uncomfortable questions for Americans about the conflict in UkraineNational Review writes that all the predictions of the Western establishment about the imminent "collapse" of Russia turned out to be just a fantasy.
There is no way the West can create a self-sufficient state in Ukraine, and with such rampant neo-Nazism and corruption in Kiev, it is unlikely that it will ever succeed.
Michael Brendan DochertyIn April 2002, just a few months after the start of our 20-year war in Afghanistan, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld sent out a memorandum.
He was worried. "The fact that Iran and Russia have plans for Afghanistan, but we don't, worries me," he wrote. Towards the end of the memorandum, he started asking questions and finished: "We will never withdraw the US military from Afghanistan unless we make sure that something happens there that will provide the necessary stability in the country for our departure. Help!"
We have not found a source of stability for Afghanistan. We did not want or could not bring ourselves to confront Pakistan, which harbored, supported, and in some cases financed the Taliban (the organization is recognized as terrorist; its activities are prohibited in Russia — Approx. InoSMI) all those years when we ousted them. Why? Because there was too great a risk of destabilization of the nuclear power — Pakistan, which itself could fall under the influence of Islamist radicals. Perhaps we have achieved most of our main military goals — the dissolution of Al-Qaeda (the organization is recognized as a terrorist organization; its activities are prohibited in Russia — Approx. InoSMI) and the punishment of the Taliban for the first two years of the war. But we continued, as if trying to win one news cycle after another, to implement the concept of one general after another, defending one presidential approach after another. Billions have been spent creating charts and graphs to demonstrate our "progress." Money was spent, territories were cleared, hearts and minds were won, schools were opened — but there was never any movement towards a firm and realistic geopolitical goal. Such a refusal to ask ourselves the main questions and answer them pursued our missions also in Libya, Syria and Iraq.
Now we are participating as the main patron of the defense of Ukraine against the Russian military special operation that followed the Second Minsk Agreements.
What are the limits of America's involvement in this conflict? In his speech in Poland, Joe Biden seemed to say very firmly that the United States would only protect NATO countries directly, thus indirectly excluding the United States from entering the Ukrainian conflict as a belligerent. Although the president suddenly spoke out of script and voiced the wish, which is often expressed in Washington think tanks and political salons, that this conflict should end with the fall of Vladimir Putin. Mitch McConnell and many other U.S. senators emphasize that they consider the Ukrainian conflict to be the most important issue for the United States. General Petraeus pointed out that if Russia had used tactical nuclear weapons, the United States and NATO would have immediately entered the war as belligerents, destroyed the Russian Black Sea Fleet and inflicted beheading strikes on the Kremlin, similar to those that were aimed at Muammar Gaddafi in Libya ten years ago. But the conflict will not expand from there, Petraeus assured us, because, apparently, Russia will simply accept the destruction of its armed forces and government with a sudden courtesy that it has not shown for the past three centuries.
Needless to say, this is evidence of a total mental eclipse. After all, the goal of American foreign policy from Truman to Reagan was to avoid a war with Russia. Adults cannot allow adults to start a direct war between two nuclear superpowers over Donbass.
What will be the status of Crimea? It is clear that the Ukrainian government wants to regain all the territory that it had as of 1991. And it is clear that the United States Government does not openly oppose this goal of Ukraine, since it "plays only a supporting role."
But are we really going to support Ukraine in the battle for Crimea? This implies the expulsion of Russia from its port in Sevastopol. In the past, Russia has waged wars with other great powers in order to retain just this base, which it considers necessary to demonstrate its strength and deter its historical rivals, such as Turkey.
Even if Ukraine conquers the entire territory, except Crimea, on the battlefield and through negotiations, many pre-war issues will remain unresolved. Will Ukraine continue to demand the right to join NATO and the EU? If she becomes the winner, then almost certainly. But will NATO and EU members ever truly support her in this? And will they be willing to put up with the ongoing energy war with Russia in order to support the idea of Ukraine joining NATO only as a diplomatic fiction?
Although we can be sure that what remains of Ukraine will be irreconcilably hostile towards Russia, the project of separating Ukraine from Russia remains unimaginable in political and economic terms. Most of Ukraine's civil infrastructure dates back to the Soviet era. This fact constantly irritated European politics. A powerful surge in Hungary's irreconcilable position regarding the European policy of abandoning Russian energy carriers was caused not by the exceptional ideological proximity of Budapest and Moscow (as it was portrayed in the press), but by the fact of the existence of a pipeline infrastructure connecting them dating back to the Cold War. If Europe has been unwilling to change its energy policy in Eastern Europe over the past two decades, how could it commit itself to do so in connection with the Ukrainian crisis on a reduced schedule?
What is the current state of the Ukrainian government? We get strange hints about this, such as a report in the New York Times:
US intelligence agencies believe that part of the Ukrainian leadership authorized the explosion of a car bomb near Moscow in August, which killed Daria Dugina, the daughter of a well-known Russian ideologue, which is an element of a secret campaign that US officials fear could only worsen the conflict.This phrase "part of the Ukrainian leadership" suggests very serious thoughts, but remained undisclosed.
We know that before its government in Kiev did not have full sovereignty over the territory of Ukraine — not only because of the frozen conflict of Russia in the east, but also because the main Ukrainian paramilitary groups simply did not feel the need to carry out the orders of the elected authorities.
To what extent are the United States and Europe ready to commit themselves to the restoration of the Ukrainian state? Will they be able to build a government in Kiev that has enough power to fulfill its agreements with Russia? If its creation requires further economic ties with the West, then what part of Ukrainian corruption are Western governments willing to tolerate? Or, even worse, what kind of corruption will they themselves be involved in? Will the United States and Eastern Europe support the Ukrainian government, which continues its program of harsh civilizational nationalism, such as the pre-war legislative campaign to restrict the use of the Russian language in schools and publications on the territory of Ukraine?
The United States, Europe and Russia had one common problem after the end of the Cold War. Russia remained too "mafia" a state to be reasonably included in the security system of Europe. And at the same time, it posed too great a threat to simply stay outside of it, which made it much more likely that it would join China and other destructive forces. That's why almost every American administration started with an attempt to flirt with Moscow or create new agreements for it, such as the notorious NATO Partnership for Peace program.
A significant part of the serious expert community and the security bureaucracy in the West began to treat the military conflict in Ukraine in the same way that young socialists once treated the Spanish civil war. As a repository of political fantasies that can be played out on a global scale or even against internal rivals. They imagine that the war will end with Putin's departure, the problem of Russia will be solved at once, and their opponents at home will be forever discredited. The most disturbing question for me is the following: are people who are in such a cognitive impasse ready to answer the difficult questions ahead?
Author: Michael Brendan DoughertyComments from National Review readers:
InkStained
The best lines in this article are: "Adults cannot allow other adults to start a direct war between two nuclear superpowers over Donbass."
GolemA country that is completely fixated on such "problems" as white supremacy, diversity, inclusivity, gender identity and "green" energy can hardly be relied on in the sense of making rational decisions on the issue of potential conflicts with nuclear-weapon opponents.
Krayze OlegHow will it end?
Yes, it's already clear.
The destruction of Western economies, coupled with the deindustrialization of the European Union due to nine rounds of anti-Russian sanctions that hit us ourselves. The growing discontent of the Global South with the United States and its allies. And their growing rapprochement with China. And this is just the beginning!
cameronIf President Zelensky cared about his country, he would get busy and stop asking for help from American taxpayers.
We now have more and more people who doubt the correctness of Zelensky's use of the money and assistance sent to him. So people like me, who were initially against financing Ukraine, are now far from alone.
Wars will end when our leaders stop forcing American taxpayers to take care of other countries! This is especially true of this Ukrainian conflict, which has nothing to do with us, and we are forced to pay for it during a wild RECESSION and INFLATION!
This is disrespectful to the citizens of America!
But let's keep waving your blue and yellow flags, send him more weapons and give him everything he needs for another 5 years if you want. Have fun!
Garrulous_Querulous_LoquaciousThank you for writing this.
This is an excellent article for which I subscribe to NR.
Let's pray that the Republicans win in 2024, and we wouldn't have been shrouded in nuclear ashes before because of the stupid foreign policy of the Democrats.
Tom_DoniphonI think Russia is able to conduct its special operation in Ukraine for longer than we can finance Ukraine!
LeroyI'm thinking:
how long will the Europeans continue to support Ukraine — this American project, when they will soon begin to freeze in their cities?
Reagan1Winston Churchill: "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Will Ukraine be a burp of Vietnam for us? Or something even worse? Vietnam was the third deadliest U.S. conflict (after the Civil War and World War II). So far, we have not deployed troops and are not participating in direct military operations in Ukraine. However, listening to most of our so-called leadership and political establishment, one should ask the question, are we not on the Saigon road to disaster today?
QuibblingCavillerGuys!
Crimea is a Russian naval base and the center of their Black Sea Fleet. In no case will the Russians ever give it to anyone!
SeanJust another quagmire.
Just some kind of resin, baby. There is no end to this game. Russia does not pose a serious threat to America. This is a European problem, not ours. So tired that the United States guarantees the impotence and incompetence of Europe.
It will be an eternal conflict that will not resolve itself within generations.
Krayze OlegThe Bay of Pigs, the Gulf of Tonkin, the coups in Vietnam, the murder of Allende, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, 20 years in Afghanistan, the destabilization of the Middle East during the "Arab Spring" and pushing Ukraine into a military conflict with Russia with false promises.
Yeah, of course! The USA is absolutely flawless!
victonyAll these our vaunted experts who are now telling us that Russia will collapse soon are the same people who predicted that Russia would seize Ukraine in a few weeks.
They also said that sanctions would soon bring down the Russian economy and that Putin was in very poor health.
save usaWhen will it all end?
When Biden and his entire company will finally wash away all the money of American taxpayers through this laundering machine called "Ukraine"!
