118 - Ending the War: But on Ukraine's Terms
Washington and the West are remiss in encouraging Ukraine prematurely to sue for peace. Although President Biden says that whether and when to seek a truce with the Russians is up to Kyiv, several of his key political and military advisors, some progressive Democrats, and a number of arch Trumper Republicans want out.
Ukrainians would be much warmer this winter and more civilians would enjoy electric power and access to clean water if the fighting stopped. But until either Putin is removed from office or his generals decide to withdraw entirely from Ukraine, a truce would simply let the Russians regroup, obtain more armaments, and ready themselves for further assaults.
President Volodymyr Zelensky is being pushed by Washington to be more receptive to negotiations with Putin. But Zelensky is rightly insisting that Russian regime change is a necessary prerequisite for sustainable peace in Ukraine. Putin must first go, he says.
Zelensky correctly takes a hard line despite the fact that Russian missiles and drones have crippled more than 25 percent of his country’s electrical and potable water infrastructure. His soldiers will also suffer in the snow as they slowly reclaim formerly Russian-occupied villages and towns.
But what is at stake – and Zelensky is aware even if some Pentagon and other planners are not – is that the architects of the criminalized invasion will only pause their attempt to conquer all of Ukraine, not give it up. Such a supposed halt to hostilities would prove the ultimate fake. Putin’s craving for control over Ukraine and NATO would only be re-set, not removed, if Ukraine were coaxed or compelled by their Western backers and suppliers to accept a cease-fire with Russians still occupying Crimea and other pre-2014 parts of Ukraine.
Losing the ground war, Putin has taken to attacks from above because the West has so far neither helped Ukraine to control its air space nor armed it with Iron Dome type defenses (including Patriot missile systems). Putin has done so to make life miserable for Ukrainians and to shore up right-wing support at home, but also to create conditions conducive to negotiations that would give him more time to maneuver and train the new cadre of conscripts. He probably accepts that Ukrainian forces are better commanded and much better motivated than his own and that his only way forward is via a winter’s sclerosis along the eastern and southern fronts.
Thus, Zelensky and his commanders are right to double down now, despite real privations, while the Russian war machine is weak and largely stalled. The West must also commit more supplies, including potent tanks from Germany, to spearhead a Ukrainian advance when frozen roads replace this month’s difficult mud. Now is not the time or the place for a 1940s “Finlandization” of Ukraine or the conflict.
According to a one-time supremely wealthy oligarch who Putin stripped of most of his riches and sent to prison, “Putin and his inner circle have lived their entire lives under mafia codes whereby laws do not exist, and which are antithetical to the rule of law.” For Putin, says Mikhail Khodorkovsky, “there is only power.” He goes on: “If the opponent retreats and asks to negotiate, it means he has lost and can and should be squeezed for all he’s got.”
Khodorkovsky also correctly suggests that what Putin now needs is “a breather.” Reinforcing his army with new recruits has not gone well; mothers are petitioning him to save their sons. Putin’s defense industry is inadequate and attempting to catch up. North Korean and Iranian weapons are filling some gaps, but not rapidly enough. The West must not help to give Putin “a breather.”
Putin still covets two-thirds of Ukraine (at least), permanent influence over at Moldova and the Baltic States that were once conquered by the Soviet Union, and major concessions from NATO. Until and unless he and his cohort are removed from power, there can be no enduring peace along Europe’s eastern border even with a weakened Russia. That is a realistic approach that Zelensky espouses – knowing his adversary well – and must be respected.
The West has not wanted to send Putin into a dark corner that might impel him to unleash the nuclear option. That is indeed a continuing risk. But Russia’s palpable weaknesses, the erosion at home of his popular mandate for this war, and the likelihood of a major NATO retaliation probably reduce that risk considerably. Nuclear blackmail should not stay our collective hand.
In fact, President Biden, buoyed by his and America’s strong success in the mid-term elections, should now demand that Russia cease sending drones or missiles into Ukraine and, radically (but this is the time) make it clear through back channels that we are prepared to destroy drone bases in Crimea and ship launching pads in the Black Sea if the air attacks continue.
We should also join Zelensky in demanding the complete withdrawal of Russian troops from eastern Ukraine. Whatever negotiations take place should eventually occur on Ukraine’s terms, not Putin’s. We must not let an unprincipled bully destroy a sovereign nation. Pursuing such a case ought to send a message to Xi Jinping as well, helping to secure President Biden’s legacy.