My regular update on war and strategic competition, with a focus on Trump and Putin's 28-point capitulation document imposed on Ukraine, as well as my regular Big Five recommended reads.
This is a disgraceful and disgusting capitulation to a dictator, it is wholly un-American, and invites further aggression, much as Chamberlain's capitulation to Hitler in 1938 in the Sudetenland did not create "peace for our time." If anything, it ensured that Hitler would quickly try for more, which is precisely what he did - and we got World War II. Trump is a bully, a blowhard, and at base he is a coward. We have managed to get something worse than Biden's weak, timid, and feckless support - we have got chicken-hearted boot-licking of a dictator, and a half-defeated dictator at that. How is it that these kinds of people rise to the fore in American politics today? We need a Theodore Roosevelt, someone who would do the things which command respect, someone with real moral character - instead, it's a choice between Biden Trump, and Harris. Surely we can do better. I hope the Senate puts an end to this nonsense - and that the House reins in Trump and brings him to heel. Enough is enough. More, if you want it - https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/donnie-and-stevie-witless-peace-plan
It is painful for a European citizen who is a fervent supporter of Ukraine to read the statement released yesterday by leaders of the EU+.
Not wishing to be too pedantic, it is first of all curious that this statement should bear the letterhead “European Council “ . It is much more than that with the leaders of the UK, Canada, Norway and Japan endorsing it. The Europeans must find a way of signalling to the world that Europe is at the head of a much larger coalition than just the EU. Why not say “the EU+” from now on ?
Secondly, was it really necessary to “welcome” continued efforts by the USA… when it would have surely been enough simply to “acknowledge” these efforts?
And thirdly, why is there no mention of the fact that the 28 point plan requires Ukraine to make huge concessions while demands on Russia are non existent ?
Mealy mouthed European statements of this kind will impress neither Trump nor Putin. The EU + should be far more forceful from now on in both word and deed. Forget the risk of not angering Trump - on the basis of this “plan” he is no better than Putin and, like Putin, will only understand force !
The peace plan is full of all kinds of Trumpian blather, and this outcome would be an injustice to Ukraine and her people, but Ferguson believes that this outcome is vastly better than letting the war continue to the final destruction of Ukraine, which is where it is heading. There is going to be injustice in any case; the only question is whether Ukraine survives as a nation, or disappears. A just outcome is simply not on the menu.
The security guarantees are intended to be Article V like and could be tuned up.
Otherwise, this plan, if you strip away the cynical verbiage, is not so different from the deal which ended Finland's two wars with the USSR, and is significantly better in several respects.
Finland, under the Moscow Armistice and the Paris Peace Treaty which ended the wars:
1. Ceded territory including Finland's second city and former commercial capital;
2. In addition, leased naval bases to the USSR for 50 years;
3. Demobilized its wartime army and agreed to severe caps on military force (34,400 Army personnel, 4,500 navy, 3,000 air force, 60 aircraft and zero bombers, zero submarines, zero guided missiles, etc.);
4. Legalized the Communist Party of Finland and banned all Nazi and fascist organizations;
5. Committed to not join any military alliances;
6. Paid about $7 billion in reparations to the USSR.
Far from using this as a springboard to restart the war after a breather, as Anne Applebaum asserts the Russians "always do", Finland and the USSR signed another treaty in 1948 confirming that Finland would not join the Warsaw Pact, etc.
Finland did very well indeed with this. Finland's foreign policy and military were constrained for decades, but Finnish democracy flourished and Finland's nationhood was never threatened.
The Trump plan gives all of this plus $200 billion of reconstruction (if the Russians agree, which I doubt, but that's another question) instead of billions of reparations. And Ukraine gets a security guaranty quite like Article V (especially if it's improved in negotiations) whereas the Finns got nothing.
The territory ceded would be lost anyway -- let's be honest about how it's going on the battlefield. NATO membership is never happening in any case.
It's really not all that bad, certainly not compared to the alternative, which is the final destruction of Ukraine and REAL capitulation, which is not this, but rather, when the enemy does whatever he wants to, with a fully defeated enemy.
The case of Afghanistan has NOTHING to do with this, other than the egregious style of the Trump administration's foreign policy, but STYLE is not the question here. We lost the Afghan war totally, so the winner took what he wanted -- that was an actual capitulation. WE HAVE NOT YET LOST THE UKRAINE WAR TOTALLY. But we have a narrow window to get something better than an actual capitulation, and the Trump deal is vastly better than that. The sad fact is that we have waited far too long for this, based on unrealistic (probably propaganda-fueled, and certainly wishful thinking-fueled) expectations about the battlefield result, and we have little bargaining power now. We will have a lot less still, a few months from now. Sir Niall believes that Trump's "real estate style" of negotiation, as repulsive as it looks and feels, might actually be the best hope of getting the least bad outcome here. I tend to agree. The trajectory of this war is leading Ukraine to hell, and to likely loss of statehood. It needs to be stopped ASAP. If possible. If it's not already too late, which may be the case.
Well I guess what is clear is that the USA has transformed from friend of the west to back stabbing traitor. That is hard to compute , but could mean very dark times for the world and I imagine WE3. Is that too much of a stretch?
This is a sad and dangerous time for the US. Trump is a disaster and, even more disturbing, is the fact that so many Americans have no clue about what is going in.
Thanks for this post. It seems as though where one stands on this deal for Ukraine depends on whether Ukraine is on the verge of collapse. I don’t know how the administration assesses the situation but, I think many of their voters have a pessimistic view of both Ukraine’s military situation and government.
Some very concerning developments in Ukraine and east Asia. We are in for some interesting and likely turbulent times.
You point “A divergence has emerged between China’s English-language and Chinese-language propaganda about Taiwan—a split that suggests Beijing may be taking initial steps to prepare its people for the possibility of war. Whereas Chinese statements aimed at international audiences downplay the possibility of an invasion, China’s domestic propaganda has stated that Taiwan’s “provocations” could justify military action in the near future.” is particularly thought provoking… We can but watch, prepare and wait.
This is a disgraceful and disgusting capitulation to a dictator, it is wholly un-American, and invites further aggression, much as Chamberlain's capitulation to Hitler in 1938 in the Sudetenland did not create "peace for our time." If anything, it ensured that Hitler would quickly try for more, which is precisely what he did - and we got World War II. Trump is a bully, a blowhard, and at base he is a coward. We have managed to get something worse than Biden's weak, timid, and feckless support - we have got chicken-hearted boot-licking of a dictator, and a half-defeated dictator at that. How is it that these kinds of people rise to the fore in American politics today? We need a Theodore Roosevelt, someone who would do the things which command respect, someone with real moral character - instead, it's a choice between Biden Trump, and Harris. Surely we can do better. I hope the Senate puts an end to this nonsense - and that the House reins in Trump and brings him to heel. Enough is enough. More, if you want it - https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/donnie-and-stevie-witless-peace-plan
Thanks for this timely and welcome post.
It is painful for a European citizen who is a fervent supporter of Ukraine to read the statement released yesterday by leaders of the EU+.
Not wishing to be too pedantic, it is first of all curious that this statement should bear the letterhead “European Council “ . It is much more than that with the leaders of the UK, Canada, Norway and Japan endorsing it. The Europeans must find a way of signalling to the world that Europe is at the head of a much larger coalition than just the EU. Why not say “the EU+” from now on ?
Secondly, was it really necessary to “welcome” continued efforts by the USA… when it would have surely been enough simply to “acknowledge” these efforts?
And thirdly, why is there no mention of the fact that the 28 point plan requires Ukraine to make huge concessions while demands on Russia are non existent ?
Mealy mouthed European statements of this kind will impress neither Trump nor Putin. The EU + should be far more forceful from now on in both word and deed. Forget the risk of not angering Trump - on the basis of this “plan” he is no better than Putin and, like Putin, will only understand force !
Shame on those who advocate surrender. Better to fight a protracted insurgency than die in chains.
For a different view of Trump's peace plan, see Sir Niall Ferguson's post here: https://x.com/nfergus/status/1991658024906445117, "The Best is the Enemy of the Good".
The peace plan is full of all kinds of Trumpian blather, and this outcome would be an injustice to Ukraine and her people, but Ferguson believes that this outcome is vastly better than letting the war continue to the final destruction of Ukraine, which is where it is heading. There is going to be injustice in any case; the only question is whether Ukraine survives as a nation, or disappears. A just outcome is simply not on the menu.
The security guarantees are intended to be Article V like and could be tuned up.
Otherwise, this plan, if you strip away the cynical verbiage, is not so different from the deal which ended Finland's two wars with the USSR, and is significantly better in several respects.
Finland, under the Moscow Armistice and the Paris Peace Treaty which ended the wars:
1. Ceded territory including Finland's second city and former commercial capital;
2. In addition, leased naval bases to the USSR for 50 years;
3. Demobilized its wartime army and agreed to severe caps on military force (34,400 Army personnel, 4,500 navy, 3,000 air force, 60 aircraft and zero bombers, zero submarines, zero guided missiles, etc.);
4. Legalized the Communist Party of Finland and banned all Nazi and fascist organizations;
5. Committed to not join any military alliances;
6. Paid about $7 billion in reparations to the USSR.
Far from using this as a springboard to restart the war after a breather, as Anne Applebaum asserts the Russians "always do", Finland and the USSR signed another treaty in 1948 confirming that Finland would not join the Warsaw Pact, etc.
Finland did very well indeed with this. Finland's foreign policy and military were constrained for decades, but Finnish democracy flourished and Finland's nationhood was never threatened.
The Trump plan gives all of this plus $200 billion of reconstruction (if the Russians agree, which I doubt, but that's another question) instead of billions of reparations. And Ukraine gets a security guaranty quite like Article V (especially if it's improved in negotiations) whereas the Finns got nothing.
The territory ceded would be lost anyway -- let's be honest about how it's going on the battlefield. NATO membership is never happening in any case.
It's really not all that bad, certainly not compared to the alternative, which is the final destruction of Ukraine and REAL capitulation, which is not this, but rather, when the enemy does whatever he wants to, with a fully defeated enemy.
The case of Afghanistan has NOTHING to do with this, other than the egregious style of the Trump administration's foreign policy, but STYLE is not the question here. We lost the Afghan war totally, so the winner took what he wanted -- that was an actual capitulation. WE HAVE NOT YET LOST THE UKRAINE WAR TOTALLY. But we have a narrow window to get something better than an actual capitulation, and the Trump deal is vastly better than that. The sad fact is that we have waited far too long for this, based on unrealistic (probably propaganda-fueled, and certainly wishful thinking-fueled) expectations about the battlefield result, and we have little bargaining power now. We will have a lot less still, a few months from now. Sir Niall believes that Trump's "real estate style" of negotiation, as repulsive as it looks and feels, might actually be the best hope of getting the least bad outcome here. I tend to agree. The trajectory of this war is leading Ukraine to hell, and to likely loss of statehood. It needs to be stopped ASAP. If possible. If it's not already too late, which may be the case.
Could not agree more.
Well I guess what is clear is that the USA has transformed from friend of the west to back stabbing traitor. That is hard to compute , but could mean very dark times for the world and I imagine WE3. Is that too much of a stretch?
This is a sad and dangerous time for the US. Trump is a disaster and, even more disturbing, is the fact that so many Americans have no clue about what is going in.
Thanks for this post. It seems as though where one stands on this deal for Ukraine depends on whether Ukraine is on the verge of collapse. I don’t know how the administration assesses the situation but, I think many of their voters have a pessimistic view of both Ukraine’s military situation and government.
Some very concerning developments in Ukraine and east Asia. We are in for some interesting and likely turbulent times.
You point “A divergence has emerged between China’s English-language and Chinese-language propaganda about Taiwan—a split that suggests Beijing may be taking initial steps to prepare its people for the possibility of war. Whereas Chinese statements aimed at international audiences downplay the possibility of an invasion, China’s domestic propaganda has stated that Taiwan’s “provocations” could justify military action in the near future.” is particularly thought provoking… We can but watch, prepare and wait.