Ukraine, Part II (My Take Continues)

One thing that I would like everyone to consider is how the rest of the world will react.  By this I mean, will other countries see the newly formed Russian-Chinese axis as predominant?  Will they view the Western, NATO-aligned countries as weak?  If that happens, what does this mean for the world?  Will other countries align with Russia and China, resulting in a shrinkage of free societies?  We have already seen how China's economic might has been used to squelch free speech even in the USA (think LeBron James and the NBA).  We saw a steady growth of democracies following WWII.  I now fear a steady decline.

Putin's actions bring to mind the 2012 presidential debate between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.  Romney called Russia our greatest geopolitical threat.  Obama mocked him with this line:  "...the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because, you know, the Cold War's been over for 20 years."  Not surprisingly, the MSM dutifully fell in line and also mocked Romney.  As did so many on the left.   

Putin has had the world on edge, waiting to see what Russia would do.  I don't get it.  Russia has 144 million people.  But Western Europe has 197 million people.  And all of NATO has over 944 million people.  Economic strength?   The GDP of the US is over $21 trillion.  But even Germany, the UK, France and Italy each have a larger GDP than does Russia.  While Russia may not be a wealthy country, it has been spending its money on building up its military.  Meanwhile, the West has been complacent.  And our military under Biden is more concerned with Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.  That ought to show Putin a thing or two. 

Part of the problem is that Russia is the third largest producer of oil in the world, and is the main supplier of natural gas to...yep, Europe.  So, Germany, has now decided to not accept gas from the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.  So what?  That is not the only pipeline from Russia into Europe.  And Italy's Prime Minister has stated that he does not want sanctions on Russia touching the Russian energy industry.  At a NATO summit in 2018, Trump complained about Germany (although they're not alone) sending billions of dollars to Russia for their oil and gas.  

But what has Biden done?  Taken us from an energy independent country to a country that gets 3% of our oil from Russia.  A mere days into his term, Biden signed executive orders halting new oil and gas leases, and requiring a review of existing leases.  And, of course, Biden put a stop to the Keystone XL pipeline.  Had he not taken these measures, the US could be supplying energy to Europe.  That would hit Putin where it hurts, costing him billions of dollars.

So what about sanctions?  They never work.  Besides, now that Putin and Xi seem to have a cozy relationship, China (with the second biggest GDP after the US) can easily make up whatever Russia loses from Western sanctions.  

Another thing to consider.  Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, all former Soviet Republics, agreed to give up their nuclear weapons.  With the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, those countries were given security assurances for their territorial integrity - in exchange for relinquishing their nukes.  Those assurances were given by Russia, the UK and the USA.  So much for the US standing by our commitments.  In the event that our retreat from Afghanistan did not signal the countries of the world just how unreliable the US could be, we now have the US disregarding our commitment in Europe.  

So what would I do?  What I would have done is insisted on NATO sending troops into Ukraine, and definitely enough to protect Kyiv.  I know, Ukraine is not a member of NATO, and therefore we have no treaty obligation to defend them.  And I know that Ukraine is not a "perfect" democracy.  But I agree with President Kennedy regarding the inherent obligation to "assure the survival and the success of liberty."

Ukraine, Part I (My Take)

As I type this, Ukraine is under attack.  There is shelling in the capital city of Kyiv.  I am well aware that many believe that what happens in Ukraine should not concern the United States.  I disagree with that assessment.  Ironically, some have suggested that I follow whatever Tucker Carlson of Fox News says.  He does not understand why we need to support Ukraine in any way.  (As an aside, I rarely watch Carlson's show.  I like to say that my 3 favorite people on Fox are the 3 H's - Hannity (Sean), Harris (Faulkner) and Howie (Kurtz).)

My initial reaction was thinking about how so many people could feel the world had become safer with the fall of the Soviet Union.  The West had prevailed.  And, while for some I always need to acknowledge that the West is not perfect, for most people there is an understanding that Western values of freedom and liberty are infinitely superior to those of dictatorial regimes such as exist in Russia and China. 

Some, reading the mainstream media (MSM), felt it incumbent to advise me that Trump described Putin's moves as "genius."  They could not believe that Trump was, again in their minds, supporting Russia.  I replied that they were accepting the left-wing spin of the MSM.  Me:  "But if you get Trump's point, he's saying that Putin outsmarted Biden (pretty easy) and that Putin would not have done this with Trump in the White House."  Yet another insisted it would have happened, and even worse, if Trump was still President.  I chose not to point out the obvious - Putin invaded Crimea during the Obama/Biden Administration, did nothing during the Trump Administration, and now invaded Ukraine during the Biden/Harris Administration.

Biden decided that the mere threat of sanctions would deter Putin.  Since when does that work?  Here was some tough talk out of Biden:  "Who in the Lord's name does Putin think gives him the right to declare new so-called countries?"  Who in the Lord's name?  While a prior President appealed to our adversaries to take the path of peace, he also declared:  "We dare not tempt them with weakness.  For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed."  

And this famous line from the same President:  "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty."  These quotes are, of course, from the inaugural address of John F. Kennedy.  

Biden has sent defensive weapons to Ukraine.  He has sent arms and troops to the Baltic countries of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, all former Soviet Republics and now NATO members.  On the one hand, he has said we will defend NATO countries; on the other hand he has said "we have no intention of fighting Russia."  So who will defend those three small countries if Putin goes after them next?  

Putin has referred to the end of the Soviet Union as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century."  In attempting to justify the invasion of Ukraine, Putin asserted that Ukraine was never really its own country:  "I will start with the fact that modern Ukraine was entirely created by Russia or, to be more precise, by Bolshevik, Communist Russia."  But then he went on to recognize the "independence and sovereignty of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic."  So, Ukraine was never an independent country, but these two small areas that are part of Ukraine were independent countries?  Maybe logic is not Putin's forte.   

It is quite clear that Putin wishes to reinstate the Soviet Empire.  For all intents and purposes, he already controls Belarus.  Just last month he had troops in Kazakhstan.  Soon he will have Ukraine.  Does anyone doubt that the Baltic countries will be next?