The Ukrainian Enigma (Two Year Eval)

      

    It has been two years since Russia invaded Ukraine.  Two years since many Americans were breathlessly outraged at the audacity of President Vladimir Putin’s attempt to recoup the old Soviet Union.  Two years since Democrats and Republicans stood in bipartisan support of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians.  Since a number of American soldiers courageously and independently volunteered to join the Ukrainian cause, with some not returning home.

     How are we looking now?

     I guess at this point it should come as no surprise, but this complicated global event that has the potential to have a far-reaching ripple effect, has evolved (or devolved) into a political football.  The unspeakable horrors committed by Hamas and the ensuing events in Gaza have become the new, shinier object to distract us.  The upcoming election has made everything even more hyper-partisan.  And now the US support of Ukraine (once considered a relative no-brainer) has been tied by some Congressmen to border control, complicating the matter exponentially.  Add to this the flea-like attention span of the typical citizen, and we see that Americans have become the modern-day baby in the playpen. In an attempt to keep the baby from crying for attention, parents supply toy after toy after toy.  With each newer and better option,the child is crowded and overwhelmed. Instead of focusing attention on one, the child focuses on none. Politicians know this, and swamp us with so much information (or misinformation), that we can’t give anything the attention it deserves.

     This war in Ukraine has echoes of the Korean War from 1950-53, when North Korea tried to reunite the divided peninsula with the backing of the Soviet Union, only to be pushed back across the 38th parallel by a South Korea that was backed by the United Nations.  That war is officially still happening.  In the case of Ukraine, Russia has been pursuing a land grab in the name of reunification since 2014, which got decidedly more aggressive two years ago.  Ukraine said enough is enough, and NATO agreed.  Both Russia and Ukraine/NATO have grabbed the tiger by the tail, creating two bad options.  Hold on or let it go. 

     Putin is cornered, crazy, and craving alliances.  He seems to have received some support in the form of weapons from North Korea, drones from Iran, and some political cover from China (China is closely watching what happens in Ukraine so they can gauge how to handle Taiwan). Reports have stated that Putin is clearing out the Russian prisons, turning prisoners into soldiers with the promise of freedom for murderers and rapists if they serve six months and survive. All of this leads to the conclusion that he feels he has enough resources to outlast Ukraine in the long game, which may be correct if NATO fails to stand behind them like a group of threatening big brothers.

     Speaking of NATO, some of Putin’s desire to take back Ukraine was to keep it from joining NATO and eventually weakening this alliance that has grown from its original twelve in 1949, to 32 today.  In fact, in the succeeding years, five Warsaw Pact countries (Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania) as well as three former Soviet satellite states (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) have joined NATO.

 

   

    With Finland joining NATO in April, 2023, and Sweden doing the same in March, 2024, you can almost understand why Putin would feel the world closing in on him, and ending any chance of a cease fire. It may also have expedited the killing of his main political opponent, Alexei Navalny.

 

     A year ago, I watched a UHS school mate, Diane Becker, stand on a Los Angeles stage and accept an Oscar as producer of the documentary “Navalny”.  The movie is an incredible look behind the scenes at a man who dared take on one of the most powerful and dangerous autocrats in the world, even returning to Russia after a nearly successful poisoning.  He was immediately imprisoned, eventually moved to a penal colony in the Arctic, and now dead under very suspicious circumstances.  Just another piece of evidence that Putin is feeling the pressure.

  

     So what are we supposed to do with this situation?  End support? Leave Ukraine and NATO fend for itself? Allow Putin the possibility of a victory?  Or, continue supplying billions of dollars in support with no end in sight (see Afghanistan)? Hope that Russia doesn’t “accidentally” bomb a NATO ally, officially obligating us to join in a retaliation?  It is a razor thin tight-rope.

     We have been in similar situations before regarding both world wars.  Woodrow Wilson ran for re-election in 1916 with the slogan, “He kept us out of the war!”  Yet, the Germans seemed intent on provoking us (sinking of the passenger ship Lusitania, constant U-Boat sinkings of US merchant ships without warning, Arthur Zimmerman’s attempt to get Mexico as an ally, etc.), forcing Wilson to ask Congress for a declaration of war.  The trench warfare that had dragged on without us from 1914-17, mercifully came to an end in 1918 as the US came off the bench like an All-Star in the 4th quarter.

       The US also tried to stay out of World War II, as FDR tip-toed the line between helping our allies and not picking sides in the European conflict. Despite the constant whining by Stalin and begging by Churchill, FDR took a hard pass on injecting the US into an increasingly volatile situation.  A series of Neutrality Acts, the cash and carry program, followed by the Lend-Lease Act, progressively inched us closer to entry into the war as Hitler collected more and more European countries like trophies. Ironically, it was the Japanese who forced our hand with the attack on Pearl Harbor.  Once again, we had little choice.

      Which brings us back to Ukraine.  An end of US support for Ukraine and NATO could be a make or break moment that could resonate for decades, with escalating casualty counts.  Currently used tools of war include supersonic missiles, exploding drones, and the Patriot missile defense system supplied by the US.  Russia now directly borders the NATO countries of Estonia, Latvia, and Finland.  Poland borders on the Russian friendly Belarus.  Any attack by Russia on a NATO member triggers Article 5, and the commitment for all members to treat an attack on one as an attack on all.  Nuclear weapons are not out of the question.  Could a “misfired” missile that “strays” across the wrong border trigger World War III?

     Russia has a history of seeing negotiation and complacency in other countries as  weakness, and probably the reason he felt the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was timely. Here is to hoping we help show strength in our commitments to NATO, keep the politics at a minimum, and pressure Putin to slowly moon-walk back home.  Collectively holding onto the tiger’s tale until it tires out seems to be the best bad option available.  Letting go could be a catastrophe in many ways.