There is no doubt that he wants a “diplomatic solution”, and that
he would restore peace in a heartbeat, provided that he gets to
determine the size and shape of Ukraine, keeps some of its territory,
retains veto power over its sovereignty, and reconstructs the nation
in a way that is unacceptable to almost all its citizens, while
reducing it to a meaningless appendage of Russia.
On either side of him sit Merkel and Hollande. They, too, have a
diplomatic solution – it’s called the Minsk Agreement. But five
months have passed and neither Putin nor his clowns had shown the
least bit interest in living up to their commitments. They can
afford to wait and ramp up the mayhem until European leaders offer up
major concessions on Ukraine. The best that the two European leaders
could do is float some trial balloons such as demilitarized zones and
freezing of the conflict in place. Undoubtedly, Ukrainian
authorities would have responded by suggesting Schleswig- Holstein or
Alsace-Lorraine as suitable alternatives for testing Russian
trustworthiness and frozen conflicts.
Both sides have offered up their diplomatic solutions and have no
more to offer. Putin is not particularly distressed. His trains and
“”humanitarian convoys” filled with troops and armaments will
keep rolling into Ukraine busily implementing a military solution
while claiming that there are no “military solutions”. Merkel and
a host of European leaders, for their part, will join the chorus by
denying Ukraine defensive weapons because – after all – there “can
only be a diplomatic solution.”
Those who support Putin’s strangely strident insistence that
Ukraine remain defenseless postulate the following:
(a) Putin is prepared to “absorb huge costs” in subduing Ukraine.
(b) The U.S. risks being drawn into the conflict.
(c) Ukraine should settle (in the words of a recent op-ed writer) for
a “festering frozen conflict” or a perpetual buffer state.
As to (a) Ukraine is also prepared to “absorb huge costs”
in defending its independence. Are the proponents of this argument
suggesting that Europe and the U.S. make it easy for Russia to subdue
neighboring states? Arm Ukraine with defensive weapons and let Putin
figure out how much Russians are ready to pay for his
fantasies.
As to (b) Ukrainians have unequivocally stated that they are
confident of their own ability to defend their nation. They have the
personnel and they have the determination….all they need are the
tools and the training. It is highly unlikely that even
saber-rattling Putin would want to draw the U.S. into conflict over
weapons needed to curtail his own aggression. Putin may be unbalanced
but he’s not stupid.
As to (c) the proposal is so absurd (and arrogant) that the only
response it deserves is that the proponent go fester and buffer
himself..
However, there IS a diplomatic solution. Putin wants no part of it
because it spells the end of his military solution and would force
him back to the negotiating table. It is logical, simple, and has
worked for thousands of years. Whenever two countries go to war they
will fight for as long as one country believes it can defeat the
other. When it becomes clear that neither party will “win” and
that continuance of hostilities will simply increase costs but
without benefits, they will seek a “diplomatic solution”. In
fact, Putin knows that 70% of his citizens do not want to go to war
against Ukraine and that his economy is already reeling from oil
prices, isolation, and sanctions and has nowhere to go but down.
Providing Ukraine with the weapons it needs may very well be the one
missing piece needed to stop the war and ensure lasting peace in that
area of the world.
