I am deeply distressed about the issues raised in James Joyner’s post, criticizing Pope Francis’s stance on the war in Ukraine:
The problem with all of this is that it requires Francis to not only reject the West but centuries of Just War doctrine created by his own church, going back to Augustine and Aquinas. Putin invaded a neighbor without just cause and has committed mass atrocities, thus violating every principle of both jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Treating the situation as though it were simply a diplomatic squabble that needs to end is, well, evil according to his own church’s longstanding teachings. That those teachings are at the core of international human rights law simply compounds the evil.
I don’t believe that the war in Ukraine is a just war being waged justly, particularly but not exclusively on the part of the Russians. I don’t trust the reports we’re receiving about the war from anybody.
Furthermore, I don’t believe there is such a thing as a good war. There are only wars that are better than the alternative.
I also have questions:
- How can we actually determine what’s going on?
- Is the Ukrainian government a just authority?
- What is a realistic way to conclude the war?
and, most importantly, if it is a war of good vs. evil with the Ukrainians good and the Russians evil, why don’t the government of the countries representing most of the people in the world see it that way?
A call for a ceasefire and peace talks seems more reasonable than a long Conclave and resulting encyclical on Just War and how Ukraine/Russia must stop fighting. The fog of war is very thick and a case could be made that we can rattled Putins cage one too many times.
The war began in 2014 when the US overthrew the legitimate, democratically elected government led by Yanukovych, and installed the present nazi junta. Since the overthrow, the US has actively blocked every attempt to negotiate any sort of cease fire. or settlement.
There can be no peace in Ukraine or anywhere else until the US is disarmed dismantled.
Some of it is the nature of ideologies involved.
Unlike the Soviet Union and its radical and universal ideology; with its call to export revolution threatening to a diverse group of cultures (“Western”, “Islamic”, “Latin America”), the Russian Federation’s ideology (to the extent it has one) of “nationalism” is particular to Russia and the war in Ukraine doesn’t pose a risk to countries outside of the ex-Soviet bloc unless one supports Ukraine.
Then I think people just perceive this war as similar in nature to conflicts that occur when an empire falls apart; which rarely are characterized as fights of good and evil. For example, India and Pakistan over Kashmir; the Vietnam War (French empire), any number of conflicts in the Mideast, etc.
That explains much of the reaction in Latin America, Islamic World, South Asia and Southeast Asia.
The other thing is Francis position is trying to not add to the oil to the fire.
Again, Russia isn’t the Soviet Union. The Orthodox church is integral to Russian identity in a way it wasn’t for the Soviet Union. Unapogetically taking Ukraine’s side would heighten a sensitive rift in Christianity, and fuel the religious aspect of the conflict — Moscow has repeatedly accused Ukraine of schism. It would be disastrous if Russia starts accusing the West, symbolized by the Pope, as calling for a repeat of the 4th crusade.
Ukraine is a sovereign country. Ukraine was taking no actions, making no plans to attack Russia. There is no justification for Russia attacking Ukraine. As to the conduct o the war it is hard to know what is going on, but we have well documented evidence of Russian behaviors n the past and what they have been doing is consistent. One of their main group of fighter is a bunch of convicts let out to fight.
The rest of the world doesnt care or they read stuff like you often cite. China and India make up most of the “rest of the world” and they are hoping for good deals on oil and gas.
Steve
But I do believe the rest of the world cares.
Sino-Russo rapprochement that made China neutral in this war required the two countries to settle the Sino Soviet split, which contained a huge ideological disagreement about their respective variants of communism.
Also, the Islamic world has been neutral on this war; with Iran even arming Russia. They played a key role in the proxy war in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. I doubt Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar would have been neutral if Russia was communist and committed to inciting revolution in the Middle East.
I don’t know that Ukraine is the “Good,” but they were the innocent party here, attacked by Putin’s Russia. I think Putin’s continued atrocities put him squarely in the Evil camp.
I have no doubt the Ukrainians, too, have committed their share of war crimes. But I don’t think there’s anything close to equality on that front. And it’s only natural for the attacked party, absorbing horrors in the civilian population, to seek out revenge.
As to the rest of the world, I just think they see everything through the lenses of colonialism and empire and make bizarre conclusions. 2023 isn’t 1823 and the rules of the game have simply evolved.
I agree that the Russians were wrong in invading Ukraine. I also think that Ukrainian nationalists were wrong in overthrowing the previous government, disenfranchising ethnic Russians (which enabled them to put an anti-Russian regime in place), disallowing the official use of the Russian language (also Romanian and Hungarian) including in the schools.
But that’s not how you cast the discussion. You cast it that the Russians are evil and, presumably, should be opposed at any cost.
Ok, let me amend to say the rest of the world doesnt can about Ukraine. They arent next door to Russia so they wont be invaded. Nations next to Russia do have that concern to the extent that countries that were staying neutral in the past are joining NATO now.
Steve
and, James:
How do you know that? Because it wasn’t published in the NYT or WaPo? I’ve read reports (in the Russian language media) that the Ukrainians were shelling apartment buildings in Donbas before January 2022.
Everybody has their own facts at this point. I’m skeptical of just about anything.
Everybody has their own facts at this point. I’m skeptical of just about anything
I think more and more people are falling into the category of becoming a chronic skeptic. So many lies are woven in the facts, figures and general news being spun by politicians and the media.
” in overthrowing the previous government, disenfranchising ethnic Russians (which enabled them to put an anti-Russian regime in place), ”
First, Ukraine is a sovereign country. They get to decide how to run things in their own country. Next, you keep forgetting that the “previous” government, meaning Yanukovych, refused to sign an agreement negotiated by the rest fo the govt, largely because he was a Russian stooge at worst being paid to do so or at the very least because he was pro-Russian more than the rest of his govt. Then remember that Russian was not removed as an official language until after Russian troops engaged in Crimea.
Steve
Commenters should note that in his comment above, steve has made the Russians’ case for invading Ukraine for them: the western Ukrainians could do anything they wanted to their ethnic Russian citizens on the grounds that Ukraine is a sovereign country. That ignores international law (especially the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) and supports genocide.
Making Ukraine the official language of Ukraine and eliminating Russian is the same as genocide. Got it. Putin actually invading and killing Ukrainians is not genocide. Sounds fair and balanced to me. (Even the most far out lefties dont claim that not having Spanish is schools would be genocide.)
Steve
No although the Russians refer to it as “cultural genocide”. You said that Ukraine was entitled to do whatever it cared to within its territory. You did not exclude genocide from that formulation. Are you doing that now?
International observers have found no fair election in Ukraine since the election of Yanukovych. In addition the people of Crimea have not voted in any election since 2014 and the people of Donbas have had barriers to participation since then. If the Kyiv government is to claim Crimea and Donbas as parts of Ukraine, they should allow the people of those areas to vote in Ukrainian elections without hindrance.
“Are you doing that now?”
The Russians already invaded. I am dealing with what Ukraine actually did, not conjecture. You are the one suggesting that having to speak Ukrainian in the country of Ukraine is genocide.
“If the Kyiv government is to claim Crimea and Donbas as parts of Ukraine, they should allow the people of those areas to vote in Ukrainian elections without hindrance.”
And Russia will let the people who left, including those they have kidnapped, return?
On the elections, I finally went and looked at that. The reports I saw on the election that put Zelensky in place noted that the elections were free but not fair because there were irregularities in favor of Poroshenko. So while your claim that the election was not as well done as the Yanukovych one (which did have minor problems) the outcome seems pretty clearly in line with the candidate who should have won. Do you have info otherwise?
“the Russians refer to it as “cultural genocide—
The Russians can and will say anything they want. Do you consider it cultural genocide?
Steve
The sad reality is that ethnic cleansing works, and that is what is going on. The war and its brutality have made it impossible for anyone to sit on a political fence. That’s just the way things always go.
“In addition the people of Crimea have not voted in any election since 2014 and the people of Donbas have had barriers to participation since then. ”
The barriers to participation were the civil war and the Russian occupation and annexation of Crimea.
There’s a limit to what a government can do to provide the opportunity to vote for people in areas occupied by a hostile government. It’s hard to have a “free and fair” election under such conditions, even when there isn’t rampant corruption that is a big part of Ukrainian governance.
The reality is that there will never be another pro-Russian government in Kiev. The portion of the population that had a more pro-Russian viewpoint is either dead, already in Russia or Russian-controlled areas, or changed their minds and now hate Russia for the invasion. Getting invaded tends to motivate people to unite against the invader.