There has been another get together of the fabulous Coalition of the Willing. [1] It is clear that these European leaders expect Russia to simply jump through the ceasefire hoop provided. When they don’t, they say “Putin is dragging his feet” and “refusing peace”. Quite possibly many of them simply haven’t thought about it beyond that. We say jump and Russia hasn’t jumped. Russia bad. I think they are unaware of the arrogance and colonialism in this attitude. Part of the background to the war.
Zelensky is of course working hard to exploit the situation, to encourage distrust of Russia. (How convenient that the story of Chinese nationals fighting for Russia emerged at around the time of the tariff war with China).
I am struck by the remarks of German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius who really does seem to struggle with the political side of things. He appears to be declaring war on the US, According to the Guardian he said that the conflict in Ukraine is at the “epicentre” of a wider conflict and:
It is between freedom and oppression, between the recognition of global standards and aggressive imperialism, between democracy and authoritarianism
Think Trump’s attitude towards international agreements, Greenland and policies on the domestic front. Does Pistorius mean to put Europe against Russia + America?
Meanwhile Zelensky wants 10 more Patriots. I have no real idea but Google tells me a single Patriot missile costs between 1 and 6 million USD. He wants 10 systems. Apart for the cost; this still won’t be enough. I am not a military expert but I can think. My sense is that it simply is not possible to create a missile shield over Ukraine. Maybe with 100 Patriots and 1000 NASAMS and tens of thousands of anti-drone systems, (and the men to fire them), you could limit Russia’s ability to inflict damage substantially. Even then a few missiles would get through – and that is all they need to prevent Ukraine functioning. And, another point; hypothetical, but were Ukraine to manage to block 99.9% of Iskandars and kinzhals I would imagine Russia would then turn to heavier weight ballistic missiles. Ukraine would then need 10 THAADS. And so on. I don’t think you can provide a total air shield and expect to carry on as if the country was not at war. And as long as Russia can continue to strike Ukraine then they can continue, by default, to prevent Ukraine joining NATO and interfere with the project of building up Ukraine as a US bulwark on Russia’s borders. The latter is John Mearsheimer’s phrase. Now it seems, that the US has lost interest in this idea, is focussed more on business. But, the EU+UK seems to be trying to build up some kind of a bulwark.
We are told:
The UK, France and Baltic nations have said they will put boots on the ground in the event of a peace settlement
Even Luke Harding feels obliged to say that Russia has “categorically rejected the idea” and to remind readers that the plan depends on a US “backstop” which the US has “ruled out”! In other words, “boots on the ground” and “peace settlement” constitute an oxymoron.
What is driving this delusional idea of porcupine Ukraine?
What is driving porcupine Ukraine? We are told, repeatedly, and especially by Baltic state leaders, and Kiev, that “Poland is next”. Putin himself said some time ago that he understood why the Baltic states are wary of Russia. He is referring to the Soviet history. Though I find it hard to believe that rational people can really think that Russia is planning to attack Poland or Lithuania – and thus NATO. What for? (Unless, of course, there are provocations with the Russian population in Lithuania). As far as the Western European politicians and probably Kiev as well goes I think another factor is in play. Imagine that the war winds down. Russia gets most of what it wants; the 4 provinces, recognition of Crimea, a treaty that Ukraine will not join NATO and some kind of limit on militarisation in Ukraine. In such a situation Russia would be in a very strong position to advance further into Ukraine. But then,…. that’s it. Russia just goes back to peace! What would that do to the Western narrative of “Russian imperialism”? If Russia did not attack further West, this narrative would collapse by itself. In the collapse of this narrative the truth would necessarily emerge; Russia was, all along and in the main, acting defensively. I think this is what European (and UK) leaders are really afraid of; not Russia attacking Europe, but Russia not attacking Europe. If the narrative collapses and their publics see that and see that Russia was acting defensively, the credibility of European leaders will nose dive. (Not to mention arms sales). They would probably be out of their jobs. If they put a massive force into Western Ukraine they can then keep the narrative going: Putin is not attacking because Ukraine is so well-defended. All this is about the narrative. Porcupine Ukraine is about defending a mythological narrative about “Russian aggression”, and behind that an edifice of a corrupt European governmental system.
Notes