Then there is one other thought. If you are getting praise from the Kremlin, you aren’t on the right side of the argument. Much of what I’ve heard from people with whom I usually align politically has been Kremlin propaganda without a hint of nuance or consideration that invading another country is morally repugnant and indefensible. An internal conflict is not a justification. The popular uprising that overthrew Yanukovych, which some attribute to the CIA—as if they have that level of power (they don’t)—does not justify an invasion. There was never a justification.
The deal on the table is a shitty one for Ukraine and a good one for Russia. I always felt that the least bad outcome would be the one that would have to happen, but sucking up to Putin and pretty much rewarding him for his invasion is going to backfire. The accusations of NATO expanding eastwards begs the question, why do those countries want to join if Russia is such a peaceful neighbour? Zelensky’s point, clumsily and inappropriately made, is that diplomacy hasn’t worked so far and he is right. Moldova, Estonia, Finland and Sweden are getting twitchy and with good reason, they know how this is likely to pan out, hence the point Zelensky was making about security. Without that, no deal is worth signing, for the bloodshed will merely be delayed.
The deal on the table is a shitty one for Ukraine and a good one for Russia. I always felt that the least bad outcome would be the one that would have to happen
Ok, tell us what the least bad outcome is and how we get from here to there.
There is a widespread thought pattern in the west that tends to assume the worst about the motivations of foreign adversaries. A lot ties back to what people perceive as “the lessons of ww2 and the folly of appeasement”. The world is complex and messy. Putin is a *really* bad guy, as the leaders of most countries are. It is critical to remember that not every foreign adversary is Adolf Hitler.
There are very powerful interests who benefit financially and commercially from this war – and a lot of those interests are in the West. They do not want the war to end because they are making billions of dollars off of it – sometimes illicitly and sometimes purely legally and above board.
In any case, Germany France Italy Spain and the UK are more than capable of combining their financial and economic might to build a powerful military to protect Europe from Russia. Maybe the USA can help a little here and there, but the vast majority of the money, equipment, technology, manpower, and effort should be from Germany, France, UK, Italy, Spain. These are five very powerful countries, more than capable of cooperating, combining their resources, and defending Europe from Putin. Although I must confess that I do not believe Putin has military ambitions or an appetite for conflict in Europe beyond Ukraine in any significant way.
Same goes for Israel, Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea, Egypt, and Canada. These countries should start shouldering a lot more of the financial and military burden to protect their own countries.
The US did not step in to save Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland (West), Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Yugoslavia, Greece, the Soviet Union. Nor Poland (East), Finland, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina. Until Germany declared war on the US. All these places got extremely shitty deals. Most of them retained the shitty deals after 1945. Sometimes life sucks. Finland got way the best deal, by some brave and effective resistance and by making two well timed peace deals (with concessions).
The US has no vital interest in Ukraine. If the Europeans think they have a vital interest in Ukraine, then they have the money to deal with the problem. They are hugely richer than Russia, could flood Ukraine with armaments, and troops, if they really cared. But they don’t, they’re just posturing. Now Daddy is saying he’s got other things on his mind than coddling spoilt teenagers.
Trump’s policy is transparent. The big threat to the USA and its interests is not Russia. Russia is a poor country in rapid decline with a collapsing population. The threat is China. Trump wants to prevent a Russia-China love in, by making nice with Putin. If he’s getting praise from the Kremlin, he’s doing it… right. And he wants the Europeans to look after their own defense because the US has bigger fish to fry. The time has come for the European teenagers to grow up. If you grow up, you don’t need to give a f**k about what Trump says. Just deal with things yourselves. If you don’t grow up – then you get to suck up the consequences.
2025 Russia is not 1945 Russia or 1975 Russia. If you can’t deal with 2025 Russia yourselves, that’s your problem.
Lee Moore said it better than i did
+1
RT (Mr Putin’s international television station) is wall-to-wall hated of Western history and culture. For example its coverage of “the history of colonialism” (which comes up in short bursts – seemingly every few minutes, during what would be commercial breaks in a privately owned station) is a Soviet Marxist parody of the history of Western Empires – and of the expansion of the United States. Everything bad is massively exaggerated, and all good things are covered up.
And, of course, there is endless “Israel bad – boo-hiss” coverage, to appeal to both Mr Putin’s Islamic allies, and the increasing Islamic population in Russia itself (and plenty of RT staff members are from this community).
Oddly enough if the BBC and the Guardian stopped to actually watch – they would find they agreed with Mr Putin and co on many things, everything from Israel, to evil Western colonialism, to America being bad because it lacks Gun Control and free health care, and because it is “racist”.
As for the (alleged) operation of 2014 – or earlier operations (all those “colour revolutions” in various places – certainly not just the Ukraine) – why not hit Kiev then, why wait eight years giving the Americans (and the British) eight years to arm and train the Ukrainians?
Either do not invade at all, or invade at the time and go all the way (to Kiev not just Crimea)- do not wait eight years for the Ukrainian forces to be made vastly stronger (whilst Russian forces do NOT get stronger – because most of the money supposedly spent on them from 2014 to 2022 was stolen, and both training and tactics were neglected.
The terrible losses that Russian forces have sustained over the last three years are down to Mr Putin – he made the decision to invade (Ukraine has nothing that Russia does not have – indeed has vastly more of than Ukraine has) and he did it in 2022 rather than in 2014.
And, of course, there was the bizarre “Operation Market Garden” style plan – land airborne troops near Kiev and hope that the relief forces you have sent from the north (along long narrow roads) will get to them in time.
That was Mr Putin’s personal plan – he is no student of Caesar. Russian forces were slaughtered.
We are told that the Russian armed forces have been sorted out now – and it is true that a least the rifle (the AK12) now works properly (whose idea was it to go to war in 2022 with a rifle that did not work properly?) – but the overall training and tactical problems of the Russian army remain.
Mr Putin has been in charge for 25 years – if he was a military reformer he would have done the job by now.
Still he may launch an offensive over the next few days, it is not raining and the ground is hard. But the last three years have been lots of people killed and maimed for no purpose.
No purpose? Ukraine is not going to be in NATO and Russia will gain territory in the east of Ukraine
As a thought experiment – imagine what would have happened if, instead of arming the Soviet Union (all those Arctic Convoys and so on) the United States and other Western nations had armed Germany.
Think about it – I suggest that the Germans being outnumbered would not have made the difference, not faced with rigid Soviet tactics and lack of training.
That has been the case over the last three years – the Russian Army has continued to use Soviet tactics (and has continued to be badly trained – just as the Red Army was), but it has faced an opponent (the Ukrainian military) with lots of high tech Western weapons, and (unlike Germany in the early 1940s) no shortage of fuel or other raw materials.
Mr Putin really seems to have believed the propaganda that “the Red Army won the war” and all the rest of it, he knows nothing of the vital Western supplies that went to the Soviet Union (even the Red Army trucks were from the United States and Canada – the Germans ended up depending on horses), he also seems to know nothing of the terrible shortages of virtually everything that the Germans faced. The Germans were brave fighters, and the Ukrainians have indeed been very brave (as President Trump said, repeatedly) – but it takes more than courage to win wars, and the Germans ran out of everything.
Still Mr Putin may make me eat my words – by having a successful offensive over the next few days. But that still would not excuse three years of farcical, but horribly blood soaked, incompetence.
There has been no good reason for all these dead and maimed people – both Russian and Ukrainian. The war has been Mr Putin’s personal vanity project.
Shlomo – how could Ukraine ever enter NATO?
All NATO members have a veto on new members, so just get Hungary or Turkey to veto Ukraine joining, job-done. No need for a war.
And what is the point of gaining land?
Russia has all the land and raw materials it could possibly want – this advance gains Russia nothing.
Russia is not the United Kingdom – it is not densely populated and it is not in need of importing raw materals.
Mr Putin is not Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (overcrowded and dependent on foreign supplies of everything) – he is President of Russia.
Russia does not need what he has taken – it is of no value to Russia.
I remember, many years ago, a young man making a speech explaining why these areas were of no value to Russia – that even Crimea was of no real value to Russia and it did not matter that it had been given away in the 1950s.
The name of that young man?
Vladimir Putin.
“Ukraine is not going to be in NATO…”
Ukraine was and is ineligible to join NATO. To prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, all Russia had to do was sit on its ass and do absolutely nothing.
”…Russia will gain territory in the east of Ukraine.”
So now wars of conquest are morally justified?
No matter. For what Russia spent on this war in money, men, and materiel it could have purchased the resources in that territory and still had the employees and equipment intact to make use of them.
Edit: while I was typing my reply Paul Marks stepped in and said this last part better than I did.
May or may not have been possible – and if so only for a period of time.
Because it would depend on the identity of the governments of Hungary and Turkey. The governments of Turkey and Hungary can be changed by EU autocrats to ensure smooth Ukraine accession into NATO, as the EU autocrats recently proved in their regime change operations in Romania.
Anyway, if what you were saying were true then Russia would have done that to prevent the 2009, 2004, and 1999 NATO accessions of Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Slovakia, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Bulgaria, Croatia, and Albania.
I never said anything about moral justification. Paul Marks said “But the last three years have been lots of people killed and maimed for no purpose” and that is what I was responding to.
This is probably the most retarded thing I have read so far in 2025
“The war has been Mr Putin’s personal vanity project.“
Unfortunately not. The war has broad support in Russia (though perhaps not by those actually fighting it).
Countries can have a collective culture, and the Russian culture is one of industrial empire. They think like Shlomo Maistre above and believe it absolutely is worth the lives of 5,000 Russian soldiers to capture a single Ukrainian coal mine (as long as they’re not personally one of those 5,000 soldiers). I’ve seen too many Russian videos and comments on videos to believe that they place the same value on human life that the West does. I wish that they did.
I’ve come to accept that this war was always going to happen. Putin or no Putin. In fact Putin is a moderate among the current leadership of Russia. If Putin dies he will almost certainly be replaced by someone worse.
This war wii continue until Russia loses.
Well, there goes Korea, Vietnam, Central and South America during the 1980’s, Grenada, pretty much every serious conflict the US has been in – where we’ve invaded another country to meddle in an internal conflict.
As such, its going to be hard for the US to say anything to Putin for doing what we’ve been doing for 50 years.
Russia has had successful pushes for two years now. This is why Ukraine is in the position it is in. Russia can trade 1-for-1 with Ukraine and still come out ahead.
The time to win the war was within the first year. Maybe it could have been done with better support, maybe not. But they’re past that now. They can only win if Europeans enter the field in person. Otherwise its just going to be a slow artillery grind until all the cities are rubble and there’s no Ukraine left.
And the Russians don’t care about Western concepts like ‘war crimes’.
Paul Marks said:
I said in response:
mkent said in response:
mkent literally cannot accept the mere proposition that there *was* some kind of purpose behind Russia’s actions because he is so determined to paint Russia as an irrational evil monster. Acknowledging some kind of rational, even if perhaps unjustified or evil, motivation behind Russia’s actions in Ukraine would shatter mkent’s entire understanding of reality which hinges, in part, on believing Russia is an irrational evil Hitler-like monster.
At the mere suggestion of purpose behind Russia’s action mkent collapses into a state of denial and rage, lodging irrational accusations such as “Shlomo Maistre believes it absolutely is worth the lives of 5,000 Russian soldiers to capture a single Ukrainian coal mine”. Reminds me of “you don’t care about other people” when I questioned the efficacy of wearing masks during covid.
Reminds me of the covid propaganda which captured people’s emotions and they were unable to have rational discussions.
What I learned from covid is that such people will never admit that they were wrong even years later after masses of evidence indisputably arrive.
No vital interest? Not even minor interest. If other people want to kill and die over it, they are welcome to.
I don’t even understand what the big deal is. Europe is rich and powerful. There are 8 serious countries.
United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland, Switzerland, and Netherlands.
If those countries cooperate, industrialize, and invest their own money into production of weaponry and equipment then they could conquer the whole of Russia if they wanted to. Europe can easily look after themselves.
Frankly, Putin should be very careful – and he will be.
Shlomo, I understand the Russians perfectly. You, however, are an incoherent mess. Try less incoherent rage and more time thinking about things and writing your thoughts in clear English sentences.
Until then, have a nice life.
lol ok thank you sir
@mkent
Unfortunately not. The war has broad support in Russia (though perhaps not by those actually fighting it).
I think this is something that most observers simply don’t understand. They think the Russians are some oppressed people under a tyrannical dictator that they all hate but fear like Stalin. But that is not what it is like at all as is obvious if you actually listen to Russians. Of course that would be a lot easier to do if the many in the west didn’t censor all Russian press. Of course Russians, like everyone, have diverse points of view but there is not only broad support for the war but broad support for Putin. They see things through a completely different lens than westerners.
They … believe it absolutely is worth the lives of 5,000 Russian soldiers to capture a single Ukrainian coal mine (as long as they’re not personally one of those 5,000 soldiers).
I think that is overstating it a bit, but for sure I think they place a different value on the life of an individual as a general rule than the west does. And, FWIW, Ukrainian culture is a lot more like Russian culture than it is like German or Italian or American culture.
This war wii continue until Russia loses.
Here though I disagree quite simply because Russia is not going to lose. Although the west is pumping bullets, rockets and drones into Ukraine by the boatload, the one major shortage in materiel in Ukraine is Ukrainians. And the west is not going to send their troops into combat. So eventually this ugly war of attrition will end in a peace treaty or there will be no more Ukrainians to throw into the meat grinder. Russia has, and it seems historically has always had, an inexhaustible supply of cannon fodder.
The debacle in the Oval Office is merely a delay to doing exactly the same deal six months or a year from now. Maybe the Europeans will come up with something. Then again, maybe not. They couldn’t agree on stating that ice cream is a delicious summer treat. Because they’d have to say it in sixteen languages, argue over what “ice cream” is defined as, and add a caveat warning against lactose intolerance, and that the overuse of this summer treat can cause obesity… and so forth.
I’ll say again, like I said before, all those illegal aliens that flooded across the border into the US; maybe we should send them to Ukraine once the war is done. There will be a MASSIVE shortage of men and there will be bottomless pits of money to pay for the rebuilding of the country. Seems like a good match. How do you say “one ticket to Kiyv, por favor” in Spanish?
If Russia had free and fair elections this year, Putin would probably poll better than every Western European leader.
He just can’t be bothered with the fig leaf of free and fair elections.
I think Putin is going to keep the territory invaded, there is no return to the status quo ante-bellum.
The European leadership just needs convincing(behind closed doors) they will (personally) make more money from the USA funding the peace&rebuilding of Ukraine than the USA funding the war.
That would be the people who have been reading actual Russian official & state-adjacent statements where they make it clear what their world view is & what they intend to do.
As I have said before, Shlomo is no less deluded than the people who think Israel can make peace with Hamas, ignoring what Hamas have always said their aims are. Russia seeks to expand to dominate Eurasia in a similar manner to Imperial Russia & the Soviet Union.
But he is right Europe has to step up & take the entire burden of confronting Russia. NATO must & will be replaced by a European alliance of suitable players. So nuclear proliferation also needs to happen. In this respect, Trump is just forcing the hand of Europe, making them do what should have happened some time ago.
Have you ever been there? There are & always have been fundamental differences.
What deal? I have yet to see a concrete deal on the table.
And a good thing too, since the Chamberlain/Carter/Obama/Biden* school of diplomacy consists in giving all what America’s enemies ask for, in exchange for them signing a piece of paper.
* and one could argue for placing FDR in there.
This is the key point. Concrete proposals for security should be discussed, instead of phantom deals “on the table”.
Trump could perhaps have obtained a better effect by declaring, on January 20 or 21, that all US military bases in Germany will be closed unless Germany agrees to pay the full cost, including soldiers’ salaries, and better food for them (RFK approved). Some of the bases would be moved to Poland, with half of the savings going to Ukraine.
In addition, Germany should be invited to leave NATO, otherwise the US will leave. Unless the Germans agree to compensate the Ukrainians for all the damage that they financed.
Why do i pick on Germany? Just following Alinsky’s 13th rule: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
This is true – You can add Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Lebanon, Sierre Leone, and Mali to the list of internal conflicts the US or other NATO countries interfered militarily in during the past several.
Afghanistan began as retaliation against terrorism, but devolved into NATO propping up one side of a civil war.
Iraq in 2003 and Panama in 1989 were just outright invasions of other countries.
On a separate note,
cumulative Western Aid to Ukraine is in the region of 150 Billion USD, for coming onto 1 million Russian (KIA&WIA), $150,000/Russian KIA&WIA
cumulative Russian Military budget is in the region of 80. Billion USD, for coming onto 400 thousand Ukrainian (KIA&WIA), $200,000/Ukrainian KIA&WIA
“In the war between Russia and Ukraine, the first to surrender was America.”
– Russian dissident on YouTube
“Ukrainian culture is a lot more like Russian culture than it is like German or Italian or American culture.”
That’s like saying Austrian culture is a lot more like German culture than it is like Greek or Italian or American culture.
“Afghanistan began as retaliation against terrorism, but devolved into NATO propping up one side of a civil war.”
Here, let me revise that for you:
“Afghanistan began as retaliation against terrorism, but devolved into America abandoning the Afghan people as well as its NATO allies in a shambolic Saigon-style withdrawal.”
Always glad to help!
“Russia has had successful pushes for two years now. This is why Ukraine is in the position it is in. Russia can trade 1-for-1 with Ukraine and still come out ahead.”
An utterly incompetent Russian military has been failing for three years now. They began failing from the first day of their invasion and have maintained that low standard of competence ever since. They are now in the unenviable position of failing even if they “win”. An “occupation” of Ukraine would probably be a disastrous and costly one for Russia, a country in demographic decline with a smaller economy than Italy.
Most other NATO countries had withdrawn combat forces in Afghanistan years before the American withdrawal. Canada and UK left in 2014, France in 2012. Apparently the second largest deployment left in 2021 after the US was Germany of all countries. Most of NATO had largely bolted even before Trump’s first term began.
When the Taliban walked into Kabul there was a load of seething inside Britain about it. But I remember that prior to that, no one had any appetite to deploy British troops over there again.
It was all going so well: The UK’s Reform Party (well, it is not quite a party really, it is still structured as a company) was going like gangbusters in the polls. Lots of easy interviews by YouTubers, nice reviews. Rupert Lowe seems a decent sort, very matter-of-fact, “let me tell you as a businessman” sort of schtick. Farage with his hotline to The Don. Sir Keir S totally useless, Kemi was not cutting through. Reeves, the economy, Chagos Islands farce, Lord Ali’s freebies. To be honest, Reform was on a roll. Former Labour voters and Tories are all coming together in a cuddle, forgetting their differences, to form a new unit, a new Britain!
Except, on Friday, there’s this car crash of a presser with Trump, Rubio and the scold of Munich, JD Vance. Sure, Zelensky might have worn a suit. A nice one, with a colourful Maga tie perhaps. But he didn’t. He asked about a security guarantee and mentioned that Putin never keeps promises. This should have happened behind closed doors, in my view, but it wasn’t. Trump’s big mistake. I think Vance behaved like the total cunt I suspect he is (and more and more people are waking up to this). The general impression I get is that most people think Trump & Co behaved very poorly; at worst, they fault Z for being a bit grumpy in his demeanour and naive about what was going to happen. But he’s a hero: been leading a country under attack for three years. He’s had to put up with being accused of being corrupt (I rarely see any evidence to back these claims up). The monstrosity of being called a dictator, as if holding elections with bombs falling is easy. And to be told that by a man who divides his time between the White House and a Florida beach resort. And finally, after the weekend and the London summit, Mr Farage, of the great constituency of Clacton, says Z was rude to his friend, Mr Trump. https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-zelenskyy-was-rude-to-trump-farage-says-12593360
The opinion polls may not immediately move. But the Tories are going to start working on a few lines of attack, and might actually get their act together. And one attack line between now and whenever the next GE is will be that Farage, like his chum across the Pond, is an admirer (his word) of Putin.
There are inflection points and moments when, for example, you think things have turned. This may be a small event, of no great moment. But I think Farage is fucked.
mkent: The war has broad support in Russia (though perhaps not by those actually fighting it).
And the families of those in receipt of those body bags.
Russia is indeed a strange country.
Some time back I saw a documentary about the use of slave labour to mine nickel in the far north under Stalin at a place called Norilsk. An awful old Communist, who had been a commandant up there, explained how it had all been necessary, the USSR needed the nickel, so of course enemies of the people had to mine it. Sad that so many died, but so be it.
It never occurred to this dreadful fossil that the nickel could have been mined by willing people, let’s call them “workers”, if the pay and conditions had been good enough. That is how most countries do it. It probably cost more to run the gulag system than to pay fair wages to willing workers. But that’s the Russian way.
So for all this talk of ceasefires, let us not forget that Russia gets a vote too. We might think their losses are terrible and they must surely want to stop the war. They might see it very differently. Just saying.
Pigs may fly. Labour, Tory and lib Dems all sound the same.
I think in most of those cases the advocates of military intervention referred to things like Eisenhower’s “domino” theory about the spread of communism, if my history is correct.
Some others were a mixture. When the US interfered with Persia and installed the Shah, in the early 50s, it was about fears of Soviet influence and a desire to control oil. I don’t think the CIA gave a damn about anything else.
So almost all the cases given had some kind of external dimension, however mistaken the thinking. I remember all those debates about “neoconservatives” and “pre-emption”, etc.
See a comment of mine above. Many of these actions were defended at the time, whatever you might think of the reasoning, because these countries’ situations were seen as affecting the world in some bad way. Stopping communism, etc.
The general impression I get is that most people think Trump & Co behaved very poorly;
Maybe they think that way in Europe. But not in America. You need to recognize that Americans are fed up with European freeloading on America for defense, and with Europe’s manifest inability — at America’s expense — to police their own continent and provide for their own defense. You may not agree with Americans on this, and fine and dandy if you don’t. But you need to grasp that American anger toward Europe is growing. It’s my sense that Americans overall are glad that Trump bitch-slapped Zelensky, and that Zelensky — and maybe Europe too — had it coming. Again, you may not like this; I would be surprised if you did. But that’s the reality. Deal with it.
Let me correct that. It should be ‘most journalists and political elite think Trump & co behaved very poorly’.
Scholmo – if Russia can not convince one government (out of about 20) that it has a good case against Ukraine joining NATO then the case against Ukraine joining NATO must be weak indeed. By the way, as others have pointed out, a nation can not join NATO if it is already in a dispute about where its borders should be – so the case does not even arise.
Far from being good for Russia – Mr Putin has been very bad for Russia, it was he who took the promises to end conscription and introduce trial by jury (Russia once had that – before the First World War) off the table, and it was he who crushed all opposition media and made elections meaningless. And it is he who has got vast numbers of Russians (and Ukrainians) killed – for-no-good-reason.
Johnathan Pearce – saying that J.D. Vance behaved like a cunt or is a cunt is neither true or helpful – “undiplomatic” would have been a more accurate description. This reminds me of the response to his appeal to restore Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion in Western Europe – the response was (basically) “what about Putin?” – which was an effort to dodge the issue.
Even Joe Biden lost his temper with President Zelensky, and he used rather different language than “with respect Mr President…”
Still the international elite (including the American branch of the international elite) have, privately, been enemies of the United States for a very long time – as the Bill of Rights is, to them, “crime-think” – perhaps it is better that this hatred of American principles (which were once British principles) is now out in the open.
That was NOT the response that J.D. Vance was hoping for – he seems to have believed that the Euro elite (and the international elite generally) would return to supporting liberty (in my view his hope was utterly misplaced – hating liberty is what they are about, it defines who-they-are) – but their response is still useful.
It is useful in that it shows the United States has no common principles (what some people call “values”) with this international elite – indeed that the natural relationship is adversarial (as the principles of the two, the international elite and the United States, are not just different – they are diametrically opposed).
However….
However, the ordinary people of Ukraine should NOT be confused with Justin Trudeau or Keir Starmer, or whoever – the international establishment are indeed hostile to basic principles of liberty, but the ordinary people of Ukraine just do not want their country invaded – and that is a reasonable position.
Of course it is not possible to really be friends with people like Starmer or Trudeau and-so-on because they want to put-in-prison people who disagree with them, that is the point J.D. Vance was making – how can we be friends with leaders who would put people (including President Trump) in prison because they do not like what people say – an international elite who want to utterly crush the liberties of Americans.
But the ordinary people of Ukraine are NOT the international establishment – indeed the international establishment does not even like the idea of Ukraine as a nation state with a national culture and people (because the international establishment HATES, and wishes to destroy, all nation states – all national peoples).
It should still be possible to help the people of Ukraine – to end the invasion of their country.
The objective of an independent Ukraine, not subject to Moscow, or Brussels, or anywhere else, is a legitimate objective.
It is a legitimate objective – an independent Ukraine under its own flag (not under a circle of stars – or any other foreign flag) is a good objective. Self governing – independent. Its people not ruled by anyone else – but, rather, ruling themselves.
Mr Putin’s objective is for Ukraine to really be a puppet state under Moscow’s, disguised, control – and that is a bad objective. One that should be opposed.
Martin,I know a fair mix of people, including ex-military personnel, the least sentimental or naive about wars. Oh I’m sure some people, such as you perhaps, shrug and think Trump is marvellous. But at the margins, among those with a functioning brain, there’s a definite shift I am seeing. Quite a few conservative-leaning people I know are shocked at how Z was treated.
Farage chose – poorly.
@Jonathan Pearce. If you read my whole post, you will see that my take is very similar. I had high hopes for Trump and co. From Z’s perspective, his supposed allies held bilateral talks with the enemy then came out of that insulting him all over social media, parroting Kremlin propaganda and accusing him of wanting to prolong the war. His comments were ill advised given the time and place, but his frustration was understandable, given that he had entered a hostile environment. With allies like these, who needs enemies? I am also deeply disappointed with Farage’s take. A man I’ve held in high regard for a long time. You are right, there is a subtle shift in the way the wind is blowing. My determination to vote Reform in future elections just took a dent. Given recent performance, Trump, Vance and Farage have no business lecturing anyone about diplomacy, frankly.
But at the margins, among those with a functioning brain. . . .
That’s the most asinine statement I’ve read today. Of course, here in Indiana the day is still young, but I somehow doubt that anyone will top it.
Given recent performance, Trump, Vance and Farage have no business lecturing anyone about diplomacy, frankly.
Neither do you. Frankly.
But if you folks over there don’t like Trump and Vance, and the way they are handling things, feel free to dispense with the United States and handle things on your own.
I think most Americans would be happy with that outcome. Frankly.
When the Libya war began, 559 MPs voted for it. Farage as an MEP was one of the few pols against it from the beginning. Today everybody pretends they were against it. Same applies to the Iraq war.
In 2020 barely anyone opposed lockdowns. The few dissenters were called murderers and the sheep wanted them punished. Nobody defends lockdowns today. Same is happening to woke and BLM. Everyone is fast pretending they never supported these. Maybe Zelensky-mania will be different. Maybe not though.
Unless Starmer and co cause World war Three, the next election will be about immigration, crime, unemployment, economy, housing, healthcare…the usual stuff that the public care about. The Tories will have the Boriswave invasion strapped around their necks. Labour will be probably cutting defence spending to pay off a new IMF bailout the way they are going.
Wow, that’s the comeback of the day. As asinine comments go, I think you managed to hit your own goal.
Given the MAGA reaction, neither would I, frankly. America is no longer our friend and is a poor ally. So, yeah, fuck off.
I also remember many of the great and good saying Trump was finished in 2022 because he was insufficiently pro-Zelensky. Apparently the voters wouldn’t stand for it. Zelensky was the new Churchill and Nelson Mandela. Trump was evil and Putin’s mate apparently.Well the elites and the journalists didn’t stand for it. But the public…..well here we are now.
Meanwhile the most pro-Zelensky pol in Britain, Boris Johnson, look where he is now.
What a preposterous comment. What on earth you mean by “a good case” is anyone’s guess. You cannot be this naive. Such a strange thing to say.
IrishOtter. Well, have another coffee and enjoy the sunrise.
Lee Moore: 2025 Russia is not 1945 Russia or 1975 Russia. If you can’t deal with 2025 Russia yourselves, that’s your problem.
Unfortunately Lee, even declining states – and Russia is in deep trouble – can cause a lot of problems, if only to divert attention away from these troubles, whether self-inflicted or not. That leads me to China. China’s population is in decline; the Xi clampdown on certain sectors and the massive misallocation of capital are going about as well as these things do – ie, not. China’s cities are full of bad debts and empty tower blocks built on central bank fairy dust. It is still very powerful. Xi will use nastiness against an “other” to sustain support for his regime. A familiar pattern.
I am not even all that sure that Trump thinks China is a much bigger “fish to fry”. Rather, for all his love of protectionism on trade, there is a sort of crude Adam Smith-style understanding that Trump has about a division of labour. DT wants Europe to focus more on Russia and take some heat off America’s back. Europe concentrates on Russia, the US on China/insert as appropriate. That makes plenty of sense. We should be doing this more. No debate from me there.
There’s also the fact that in much of the West, governments spend more on servicing debt interest than defence. Europe also needs to deregulate, etc. Get out the chainsaw.
But please, just spare us the JD Vance-style scolding. For every piece of European fecklessness (and I can think of many examples; I voted for Brexit in part because of it) there are plenty of examples to choose from in the US. I am sure you know that.
And remember something else. In 9/11, the UK was pretty quick to back up the US with arms and resources. Thousands of UK military personnel died. We did not demand access to US mineral rights or things like that. We dealt with it.
So, yeah, fuck off.
Well . . . bye.
Trump and Vance behaved like schoolyard bullies. Even if they were right it looked dreadful. You do not invite someone to your home to give them a vindictive dressing-down on live TV.
Not that I think they were right. Can we clear something-up? Has the USA done the heavy lifting for NATO? Yup. Did they do it entirely out of the kindness of their hearts? No. It bought them immense leverage and the ability to project power. Also, look at the airforces of Europe post 1945. A lot of F-86s, F-104s, F-4s, F-16s… Nice earners for the Military Industrial Complex, no?
What Trump & Co fail totally to realise is that with wealth and power comes involvement. No massive power can sit in splendid isolation. That didn’t work for the USA in two World Wars did it? I’m not even saying with wealth and power comes any sort of moral obligation as much as that it is just impossible to be top-dog without interacting with the other hounds. This is not a moral or even strategic issue it is just how it is.
Moreover, economically Trump & Co. are idiots. It’s not just the tariffs but it is a complete lack of the understanding of soft, cultural power. Of just how much Hollywood or XBox or Taylor Swift mean in terms of not just the bottom-line (though they do) but in terms of how the USA is perceived and whether you are seen as “the black hat or the white hat”* and it matters a lot in a whole lot of ways. I have always been an Ameriphile. I grew-up with Ronnie. Now that was a guy you could respect. The Donald… No. And to see him hectoring and bullying the USA’s natural friends and allies whilst simpering up to the vile Putin is just shocking. I’ll give the Don one thing. To be able to brow-beat a brave patriot like Zelenskyy whilst simultaneously pissing on NATO and rimming Putin for a mess of lithium is an astonishing piece of multi-tasking.
*I think everyone knows where that term comes from. See what I mean about soft power?
Meanwhile the most pro-Zelensky pol in Britain, Boris Johnson, look where he is now.
If you think BJ’s Ukrainian policy was a negative against him, then I have a bridge to sell you, Martin. It was the allegation about breaches of the rules during the plague, and to an extent, I would argue, that he was a pretty hopeless PM who indulged fantasies such as Net Zero. I haven’t seen any sign that people thought Boris’ calls to help Ukraine were a mark against him, although I suppose a few Putin fanboys might have switched because of it.
I didn’t claim that. But it didn’t save his arse though? Just as not being pro-Zelensky didn’t harm Trump’s electability (he was more popular in 2024 than 2020 or 2016). Conclusion: you’re overrating how much credence voters give to Ukraine. In Britain or America. It won’t save either Kemi Badenoch or Kier Starmer’s careers.
Chris in Texas said:
Did anyone provide a satisfactory answer to this?
It looked dreadful to you. For the vast majority of American Republicans it looked glorious and it is a damn shame that we needed to elect Trump in order for the POTUS to finally start acting in America’s interests instead of Europe’s interests.
We obviously know different Republicans
I agree with that much and I am not alone 😉
I agree with that much and I am not alone.
So everyone’s happy. Fabulous!
If this whole unpleasantness works in Europe’s favor, we are all twice blessed.
And, you’re welcome.
Hollywood, Xbox, Netflix, NFL, Taylor Swift etc etc were some of the main vectors for exporting woke ideology around the world. So if that soft power is dead, I won’t miss it.
I’m sure we do. Sure, there are some holdout Republicans who rejected Trump’s performance and disagree with Trump’s stance on Ukraine. I know one or two of them.
Trump could have dressed Zelensky down in private. Trump could have simply made the same decision regarding Ukraine in private or without much fanfare. Trump chose to do what he did (Trump and Vance baited Zelensky and goaded Zelensky into a public argument – unfortunately for Zelensky he took the bait) in public in front of the cameras for a reason. And that reason is because Trump knew his dressing down of Zelensky would be wildly popular with the vast majority of the Republicans. I promise if there is one thing Trump knows how to do it is how to appeal to American Republicans – he does this exceptionally well.
You are totally missing the plot. The point is that American Empire has been in the financial interests of Special Interests, Lobbyists, Wall Street, and the Military Industrial Complex. American Empire has not been in the financial interests of the vast majority of American Republicans who actually work for a living. Yes, of course there are pros and cons to everything in life. There are some benefits that regular ordinary Americans have gained from the American Empire, but OVERALL American Empire has been a net negative for ordinary regular American workers and a tremendous net positive for the Military Industrial Complex and the rich Wall Street vipers who feed off of American Taxpayer Largesse.
I’m not going to comment on WWII. With WWI, it was absolutely against the American interest to enter WWI, a horrible mistake and it should have never happened. Woodrow Wilson is by far the worst POTUS in American history. Anyway, I agree about involvement and interacting with other hounds. I read somewhere that Russia, Saudi Arabia, and USA may form some kind of economic alliance over the next year or two. I certainly hope that happens.
@Perry de Havilland (Prague)
Have you ever been there? There are & always have been fundamental differences.
Yes, I used to run two offshore software development centers in Kiyv and Odessa. And more recently I have been working with four young programmers. So I’ve had relationships with Ukrainian men (and a few women) for the past twenty years. Of course I know none right now because they are all either dead or up to their necks in mud and blood.
And for sure Ukraine culture is not the same as Russian culture. I never said it was. I said it is more like Russian than German or American. It still has that underlying fatalism that seems endemic in the Slavic peoples. Though perhaps a quick look at their history would tell us why.
Fraser, I know a lot of people in Ukraine who worked in areas such as technology, and venture capital. One guy, who is in his late 50s, lives outside Kiev, and does regular armed patrols. Another mate left Kharkiv shortly before the invasion and moved to another country. In Ukraine, he was there during a time when it was full of software developers. Most have left, or worked in areas such as producing drones, and of course, sadly, many have died.
Martin: It won’t save either Kemi Badenoch or Kier Starmer’s careers.
Indeed. It’s usually the economy, stupid (Copyright, Bill Clinton’s 1.)
But Farage slagging off a leader of a country under attack from Putin. Well, that’s not very bright.
Can anyone of the Trump and co. detractors here (in the context of Ukraine) suggest what would be their preferred alternative?
My preferred alternative is allow Europe do what they want to do. If Europe wants to fight Russia for another 3 or 5 or 10 or 15 years to try to recapture the Donbas or whatever, then they should do so with European Money. Not a single American cent. There is no American interest in Ukraine whatsoever.
For NATO, I do not understand why it exists because the USSR has not existed for 30 years. There is more Communism in America than in Russia. NATO seems to exist to enrich the Military Industrial Complex and Wall Street and to take American Taxpayer Money and spend it on the National Defense of Europe. I would withdraw USA from NATO.
I would also withdraw most American financial and military support from most of the rest of the world including Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Israel, Canada, etc. Most of these countries should step up in a major way and start contributing FAR more financially to their own national defense and military. I would dismantle most American military bases around the world and unwind the empire and lower the Pentagon’s budget significantly and refocus attention to domestic priorities.
Even if Trump takes some steps in my ideal direction, I have little doubt that once Trump leaves office and is replaced that the old game will return and American Taxpayers will continue to be robbed of their money to enrich the Military Industrial Complex, Wall Street, Lobbyists and give Europe and many other countries free National Security Services and Military Protection for no major benefit to Ordinary American Taxpayers in exchange.
Hopefully Trump brings a brief respite from the Fleecing of the American Taxpayers.
Shlomo Maistre:
Harsh but fair. I like the cut of your jib.
You could have said the same about the printing press 500-600 years ago, or radio in the 1930s, the internet, or pretty any advanced tech. To mock the American cleverness around tech and entertainment because people whose views you don’t like use it is silly. You’re on a damned blog right now, not in a farm hoeing crops by hand and shovelling cow shit.
Shlomo, it’s not just bankers smoking cigars and twirling their cigars in Wall Street who are making gazillions from fancy fighter planes while an oppressed proletariat struggles through the day.
While I do get appalled by defence procurement and the “complex” that goes with it, America can indeed build valuable expertise and tech, with civilian use, from these sectors. I remember reading how some of the technology that we associate with Silicon Valley in California came out of defence R&D. The same applies to the space programme.
A lot of this is corporate welfare. Paul Marks of this parish regularly points out that central banks and feckless governments drive a lot of this. Even so, a lot of Americans in states such as California earned good money in the defence and related civilian industries. Had they not existed and taxes were cut sharply, then other significant industries would have arisen, as they did after the Civil War.
US entitlement spending programme vastly outweigh the rest of the federal budget, including defence.
Johnathan, I’m not sure what your point is. None of what you are saying contradicts any of what I said. Are you trying to minimize what I said or just quibble here and there on the edges?
I agree on corporate welfare – and I would go much further than that and say that America has some capitalism but not much. What America mostly has is Corporatism. The legal privileges of corporations, the tax code (full of corrupt loopholes and exemptions), the regulatory capture of the lobbyists in DC, the de facto subsidies for mega corporations, the legal rights of hedge funds, and so much more have all combined to create a toxic mixture that has mostly removed real free markets from America. But while this is important and related to my point about NATO and the American Empire, it is not the key point.
Let me say the key point again: NATO exists to enrich Wall Street, enrich Lobbyists, enrich the Military Industrial Complex, and to take American Taxpayer Money and spend it on the National Security of Europe. Those are the main reasons NATO exist. There are pros and cons to everything in life, and ordinary American taxpayers do get some benefits from the American Empire, including NATO. However, overall NATO and the American Empire have been NET NEGATIVES for the ordinary American Taxpayers, costing us enormous sums of money and making Ordinary American Workers MUCH poorer.
The USSR no longer exists. There is really no legitimate purpose for NATO anymore. There is more Communism in American Government Bureaucracy than there is in Russian Government Bureaucracy. NATO should be disbanded but failing that USA should simply withdraw post haste.
There is no American interest in Ukraine whatsoever.
Apart from the lithium.
For NATO, I do not understand why it exists because the USSR has not existed for 30 years.
That would be disbanding a truly successful alliance. An alliance that has only had to act militarily once (I call that a success) and that was because the USA (understandably) used Article 5. Moreover, whilst the USSR doesn’t exist, Putin’s Russia is actually even more beligerent than ever. I am also aware that more UK citizens died on 9/11 than in any other terrorist attack before or since. Sorry, IRA, you’re just amateurs. I am also aware that the US lost a lot of citizens (as did the UK) due to the Hamas actions of October 7th. Whether us Brits, or the US, or whoever opt for splendid isolation trouble comes knocking whether you want it or not. When it does it is good to be able to light those beacons and signal the Rohirrim. It is even better to know that we exist as a complex web of civilizations. If the West (and, yeah, that includes the Aussies, the Japanese, the RoK, Taiwan, Israel…) is united we are invincible and the alternative is unthinkable.
These alliances (and yes, the costs must be re-balanced – I’d hate to see both the Queen Elizabeth carriers without a full complement of F-35Bs) are mutually to the good of all parties and indeed everyone else.
I was talking about American Empire and NATO. Alliances can exist without NATO and without the American Empire.
Maybe UK Germany France and Italy can start paying for America’s National Defense so that Europe can benefit from “build[ing] valuable expertise and tech, with civilian use, from these sectors” that Johnathan noted above.
I believe that blessed are the peacemakers.
I believe that war is best prevented through strength. We in Europe (I’m a Brit) have neglected to take seriously our defences since the Berlin Wall fell. Trump gave us a warning during his first ministry about NATO spending levels and our leaders ignored it. He has now called us on it. Europe lies exposed for the assortment of weak powers that it is, and it will take a generation to rebuild our defences to anything approaching fit for purpose if the US are really serious about quitting Europe. Let’s hope that Putin doesn’t notice this and decide to make mischief.
Trump, for all his blunt force trauma, has at least made a continuation of the war almost impossible. Ukraine can try and fight on alone with whatever handouts Europe can supply – or she can negotiate. I know what I’d try and do.
And, what if Trump is serious? What if he really does mean to pull out of Europe? If think that if the US pulls out of Europe, Britain needs to give serious thought towards doing the same. Do we see our future as part of the European project, or as part of the Anglosphere. As a Brexiteer, that is quite an easy question for me to answer.
We also need to consider what a European army would look like if Britain were to be a part of it. As a nuclear power with an underfunded but otherwise competent military with the rare ability to project power, Britain would immediately be one of the more powerful nations – if not the top dog. Is that a position we should be in? Would the army be integrated, use commonly sourced weapons, be controlled under one command? How would that work with national rivalries? What if, when push-comes-to-shove one nation in Europe refuses to join in with a military endeavour? Does each nation have a veto on war? Any European army would obviously become the plaything of the EU – given our, ahem, history with the EU, why would Britain allow its military to be subsumed by Brussels? What happens when Britain wants to go off and liberate the Falklands again?
For all sorts of reasons, the US walking away would be a nail in the coffin of NATO and a combined European defence force.
But, this is all for the future. In the here-and-now another thousand or so soldiers became casualties today – some of them will have died. For no good reason.
As I said at the top, Blessed are the Peacemakers. This war will not end by conquest – unless Kiev throws in the towel – instead, there will need to be a peace treaty of some shape or form. This will entail the carving up of Ukrainian land. The most obvious place to draw the line is along the border between the ethnic Ukrainian and ethnic Russian territories (The Donbas et al). If history tells us one thing, it’s not a great idea to be an ethnic minority inside Slavic lands (see the Circassians, Tartars, Jews, and many more). Let there be safety in numbers, safety in being with their own kind.
I suspect that it is not for Europe to preserve, maintain, or enforce this peace. I don’t see how we can be so active at supplying one side with money and war materiel for three years and yet claim to be, with a straight face, neutral peacekeepers. And without that neutrality, we cannot do the job. Let the UN try and sort this mess out – that’s what it is for, isn’t it?
I hope Germany, France, Italy, and the UK recognize the important benefits you are pointing out here and decide to start paying for the National Security of the United States, including financing most of the Pentagon’s budget, so that these benefits can finally be gained by Europe. USA has been selfishly hogging these benefits for ourselves for FAR TOO LONG and it is long past due for Europe to start acting in a more self-interested manner again. 🙂
Sadly Trump is probably not serious about quitting Europe. It is a bit like when Trump had the press conference with Netanyahu a few weeks ago and said “the USA will own it” about Gaza to much fanfare. The purpose was to shift the terms of public dialogue about Gaza and to enhance his own position in negotiations with other countries and parties. USA is not going to own Gaza but threatening it forces Egypt, Jordan, and others to be more flexible with their position on what happens with Gaza.
Same with Europe. Sadly we will still be paying for your National Security for many more decades and the American Taxpayers will continue to be Fleeced while Wall Street and the Military Industrial Complex and Lobbyists in DC continue to get filthy rich.
The Ukraine War may very well end, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/03/europe-trump-ukraine?CMP=share_btn_url
This is a good analysis.
As to a possible outcome: A ceasefire in place, war ends, Crimea stays Putin’s.
Zelensky gets his guaranty, same guaranty Ukraine got in 1994, and then from Obama and Biden too. A guaranty formulated in very, very strong words indeed.
Are you trying to minimize what I said or just quibble here and there on the edges?
You dismissed NickM’s point about the value that the US has in a large defence sector, by rolling out the usual tropes about Wall Street, and all the rest of it. I pointed out that this is a caricature of what actually happens, even if I agree with certain points about corporate welfarism and all the forces that sustain it and benefit from it.
Shlomo – even Lindsey Graham, the most pro war person in the United States Senate (regardless of party), believes that President Zelensky was the person at fault in the hour plus meeting in the Oval Office – although he could be making the same mistake as J.D. Vance who believed (and still believes) that President Zelensky was making faces at him for over half an hour before he, Vance, said anything. The reason I disagree with this belief is that I have seen President Zelensky before (by the wonders of modern technology) and he often twists his face into weird expressions directed-at-no-one – he does not know he is doing it, so it was not really trying to provoke J.D. Vance.
Some people have alleged that President Zelensky was under instructions by the Democrats (and the rest of the accursed “international community”) to reject the agreement that he had agreed with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and to deliberately provoke Vice President Vance, and, via Vance, provoke President Trump – but I have seen no hard EVIDENCE for this theory.
Ya of course he says that because he has to say that. Trump is wildly popular with Republicans and Lindsey Graham is a Republican from South Carolina so he has to hop on board and say it’s Zelensky’s fault while MAGA supporters cheer for Trump standing up for Americans. It’s all theater – and Lindsey is a good actor.
The reality is that Zelensky fell for the bait. Trump and Vance intentionally goaded and baited Zelensky into being a bit defensive, which Trump and Vance seized upon immediately and snowballed into a public spat. Trump and Vance wanted the argument because they wanted to dress Zelensky down in front of the cameras to enhance their own negotiating position and because they knew it would be very popular with the MAGA base, which it was. The whole thing was preplanned and orchestrated for the cameras. Zelensky walked into a trap.