I found this article by Ivan Krastev and Mark Leonard at the European Council on Foreign Relations interesting:
The European Council on Foreign Relations conducted a pan-European opinion poll across ten countries to find answers to these questions. The poll was conducted in mid-May – at a time when citizens had had a chance to absorb the shock of the invasion. The public debate was turning away from events on the battlefield and towards questions of how the conflict will end, as well as its impact on people’s lives, on their countries, and on the EU. It was also a moment when Europeans were becoming much more aware of the global economic and social consequences of the war: high inflation, and energy and food crises. This poll measures European publics’ resilience rather than just their anger at Putin’s war.
The approximately 8,000 people polled came from across Europe. The countries surveyed were Poland and Romania – frontline, traditionally Russia-sceptic, states in central Europe; France, Germany, and Italy – large western European states that previously earned reputations as Russlandverstehers (“Russia understandersâ€); Portugal and Spain – southern European states that have in the past generally been less involved in Russia policy; Finland and Sweden – northern European states that are applying for NATO membership as a result of the invasion; and Great Britain.
Their findings are summarized in the graph at the top of the page. The “Peace Camp” refers to those who believe that bringing the war to a conclusion as quickly as possible is of the greatest importance. The “Justice Camp” believes that punishing Russia is of the greatest importance. “Swing voters” don’t want to choose between peace and justice.
Note that of the ten countries surveyed in only the UK and Poland do members of the “Peace Camp” outnumber those of the ‘Justice Camp”. When you farther isolate your focus to the three largest economies in the EU (Germany, France, Italy) the positions of the three “camps” become even clearer.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/when-lies-come-home
â€Diogenes, one of the ancient world’s illustrious philosophers, believed that lies were the currency of politics, and those lies were the ones he sought to expose and debase. To make his point, Diogenes occasionally carried a lit lantern through the streets of Athens in the daylight. If asked why, Diogenes would say he was searching for an honest man.
Finding an honest man today in Washington, D.C., is equally challenging. Diogenes would need a Xenon Searchlight in each hand.
Still, there are brief moments of clarity inside the Washington establishment. Having lied prolifically for months to the American public about the origins and conduct of the war in Ukraine, the media are now preparing the American, British, and other Western publics for Ukraine’s military collapse. It is long overdue.
The Western media did everything in its power to give the Ukrainian defense the appearance of far greater strength than it really possessed. Careful observers noted that the same video clips of Russian tanks under attack were shown repeatedly. Local counterattacks were reported as though they were operational maneuvers.
Russian errors were exaggerated out of all proportion to their significance. Russian losses and the true extent of Ukraine’s own losses were distorted, fabricated, or simply ignored. But conditions on the battlefield changed little over time. Once Ukrainian forces immobilized themselves in static defensive positions inside urban areas and the central Donbas, the Ukrainian position was hopeless. But this development was portrayed as failure by the Russians to gain “their objectives.â€
IMO, there are few honest politicians in charge of this country anymore. Most decisions are made on the basis of controlling the narrative they want obediently followed by the American Pubic – whether it involves race, gender, COVID, government spending, immigration, election, or foreign entanglement policies. It’s more about expanding global power, domestically, than truly expanding the power of people living here.
In violation of a treaty with Russia, Lithuania has just blocked Russian railroad access to Kaliningrad. Since Kaliningrad has a seaport, this is not a full blockade. But it is a very significant escalation of the crisis in Europe.
Lithuania also has upgraded its relations with Taiwan and cutoff relations with China.
It would have been nice to know the peace party/war party spit in Lithuania.
Words have meaning dont they? I wonder why the peace camp is not called the appeasement camp since that seems a lot closer to what is proposed? Russia invades Ukraine and the way Ukraine achieves peace is to give Russia part of the country. Instead that is called peace? So if some guy says he wants my wallet if I support peace I should just give it to him?
Steve
From a self-defense standpoint, yes, you should. Better to lose your wallet than dead or injured.
Just a quibble. Appeasement is giving away something to forstall war.
In this case; war has occurred. Negotiations now wouldn’t be appeasement; it could be called capitulation, foolish, weak, and a number of other terms, but it isn’t appeasement.
Dave- So next week the guy shows at your house demands all the good stuff and gets to rape all the women in the house. Self defense also teaches that at some point you need to defend.
Why are we forgetting about Japan and Manchuria? Japan invaded Manchuria under some pretense. Everyone wanted peace and we politely reminded Japan of the Kellogg-Brinad pact. We know how well that worked.
Correct CO. Capitulation this time around. When Russia goes for more territory it becomes appeasement.
Steve
Only when flight or avoidance (which you might call appeasement) is not possible.