The Endgame (Updated)

I wanted to draw your attention to a New Yorker interview by David Remnick of historian Stephen Kotkin. I recommend you read the whole thing but Dr. Kotkin makes some very interesting points:

  1. Contrary to what you might have read, Ukraine is winning on Twitter but Russia is winning on the battlefield.
  2. Ukrainian valor plus Russian atrocities equals Western unity and resolve.

Here’s his epitome of the war:

Let’s think of a house. Let’s say that you own a house and it has ten rooms. And let’s say that I barge in and take two of those rooms away, and I wreck those rooms. And, from those two rooms, I’m wrecking your other eight rooms and you’re trying to beat me back. You’re trying to evict me from the two rooms. You push out a little corner, you push out another corner, maybe. But I’m still there and I’m still wrecking. And the thing is, you need your house. That’s where you live. It’s your house and you don’t have another. Me, I’ve got another house, and my other house has a thousand rooms. And, so, if I wreck your house, are you winning or am I winning?

What he proposes to conclude the war is for Ukraine to recognize that it’s lost Crimea and the eastern part of the country and that Ukraine be admitted to the European Union.

Both Ukraine and Russia have been very open about their objectives in the war. Ukraine’s are to recover its lost territory including Crimea and to join the European Union and NATO. Russia’s are to “protect” i.e. annex or at the very least detach from Ukraine the parts of Ukraine with majority ethnic Russian populations. Russia will retain Crimea. Ukraine will not become a member of either NATO or the EU. There is no compromise there.

What are the U. S. objectives? I recognize that our support of Ukraine is being sold as support for the rules-based international order but that rings hollow—you can’t support such an order without following it yourself. They can’t very well sell our support as “making the world safe for kleptocracy”. I think our objective is for Russia to lose.

If Ukraine joins the EU even NATO while Russia retains Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk, does Russia lose? Does it preserve the rules-based international order? I should also mention that I believe that if the war ends and Ukraine is admitted to the EU, it is overwhelmingly likely that many, many more Ukrainians will move to other EU countries. Ukraine will in essence be hollowed out.

The Ukrainians win from such an arrangement, the Russians don’t lose, but we definitely lose. I can’t see our supporting such a resolution.

Update

Former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko’s formula for concluding the war from Newsweek:

The winning formula for Ukraine is simple: Supplies of weapons, economic sanctions against Russia, helping to strengthen Ukraine’s resilience, the de-Putinization of Russia, and the accession of Ukraine to the European Union and NATO. Only all the elements of this formula combined would guarantee permanent security for Europe and the whole world.

which is obviously predicated on the assumption that there is some level of support by the West of Ukraine which will result in a Ukrainian victory on the battlefield. I don’t believe the numbers actually support that.

5 comments… add one
  • bob sykes Link

    Another “solution” would be for Russia to occupy all of Ukraine, and ethnically cleanse it of all Ukrainians, creating an empty wilderness for a buffer. Or maybe a homeland for the Chinese and various steppe tribes.

    Evidently, no one has suffered enough or severe enough pain, so the lesson will have to continue for a while.

    Meanwhile, the ratchet to WW III keeps clicking. And the US gets ready by shooting down high school balloonists’ clubs toys. $2 million per balloon according to Moon of Alabama:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/02/more-ballooneey-news.html#more

    I love it that all the major news outlets spent several hours of prime time talking about UFO’s. I love them UFO’s.

  • Grey Shambler Link
  • jan Link

    When is it saner minds will prevail?

    I haven’t seen any recent polls assessing how zealously people support the Ukraine/Russia war. IMO, however, it’s mainly congressional hawks (McConnell, Schumer, Graham and so on), Biden’s DOD, military Generals, and his administration who are pushing exorbitant amounts of money we don’t have, escalating a conflict which mostly belongs to the Europeans, not us. In the meantime, real problems over here are either being dismissed or ignored, coupled with bizarre distractions like tolerating a Chinese spy balloon to casually drift over vital military installations before being confronted, after which we play target practice with any benign object taking to the skies.

    It’s all senseless, coming from an administration who makes no sense.

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    Mr Kotkin proposal is not that different from what John Mearsheimer was the Primrose path for Ukraine several years before the current war — and the worse path for Western / US interests.

    Ukraine gets (is) wrecked economically, demographically. A partition of the country along the Dniper with the Western part joining NATO and the Eastern part joining Russia but most importantly, “the Russians and Americans who hate each other at that point are standing to eyeball to eyeball on the Dniper river…” Mr Kotkin would have the Dniper be half of the partition border based on where the contact line is.

    An alternate solution is to bargain away NATO/EU membership in return for Ukraine regaining more of its territory (somewhere between the current line and 2014-2020) borders. I believe a neutral Ukraine is still something Russia would seriously negotiate for.

    But in the end, both choices requires Ukrainians choosing. But Western policy is we won’t ask Ukraine to choose and support Ukraine so it doesn’t have to choose, that with Western arms it can take back everything and rebuild the whole country with Western money. A risk is if the US has oversold what is achievable, and if by chance the Russians inflict strategic defeats on the Ukrainians, neither choice is available.

  • Jan Link

    ” But in the end, both choices requires Ukrainians choosing. But Western policy is we won’t ask Ukraine to choose and support Ukraine so it doesn’t have to choose, that with Western arms it can take back everything and rebuild the whole country with Western money.”

    An analogy to how we are treating the Ukraine conflict is similar to parents leaving their unattended kids with lunch money to exist on, while they travel across town with their savings to take on the woes and needs of a family who is 24/7 being sympathetically interviewed by the press.

Leave a Comment