END GAMES
Looking back on this war or special military operation, as the Russians like to call it, there are a couple of points that stand out as really quite surprising.
Although a government's first priority is the security of its land and its people, this cannot be taken at the expense of its neighbours, instead "balance of power" arrangements normally prevail. Russia saw the threat by NATO to move into Ukraine, rightly or wrongly, as a threat to its security and given the history of invasions from the West this is understandable, at least that was Russia's perception and in the absence of dialogue perceptions count more than reality. Russia made it perfectly clear from many many years back that there is no way it could ever accept Ukraine's membership of NATO. This was what this current proxy war, as some like to see it, was all about and it's now clear, let's face it, from the Vilnius summit that NATO accepts this point, that Ukraine cannot become a member.
So what was the point of the war, how did we ever get into an armed conflict? And why is the war still ongoing instead of efforts to negotiate a ceasefire and peace agreement?
Another most surprising point that has emerged recently is that Russia is fully cognisant of Ukraine's need for security, just as it is for its own. This is clear from the negotiations that took place in Istanbul in March and April last year. Ukraine's security needs were detailed and detailed in a lot of detail and both sides signed or at least initialed what was already quite a comprehensive document. What NATO is now offering Ukraine in terms of security at Vilnius is a vetsion far cut down from the offer that Russia made last year. So again we can ask what has been the point of all this bloodshed and expense and real lasting damage to the interests of both sides in Europe?
What is preventing Ukraine from going back to that negotiating table in Istanbul and attempting to revive the agreement, such as it was, other than its own pride and the certain knowledge that what was on offer then would not resemble what Russia would be prepared to offer today?
And the snswer must be the present administration in Washington, with its strong neocon biais. Achange of policy would at least require changes replacing these people. Furthermore, if and when the Ukrainian offensive fails, next month or September, and Russia strikes in an offensive of its own, how will the Democratic party administration react? Particulary considering the effect of failure on their election chances in November 2024?
So either America takes matters into its own hands and marches in if not its own troops then troops from Poland and Romania or else the President renews his national security staff and ushers in a new strategy which would acknowledge this setback and deal with it through negotiation.
Here is an informative and interesting Scott Ritter talking about endgames as a military man.
https://www.youtube.com/live/Qglxww40pTs?feature=share
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Keep it clean, keep it lean