Why are political voices saying Ukraine should 'settle'? - analysis
Pro-Moscow propaganda is seeping into European countries: Ukraine needs to “accept” or “settle for” losing territory.
Ukraine is facing a renewed Russian offensive after 100 days of the war. This has been awful for civilians, driving some eight million from their homes. There have been atrocities and cities bombed, people have been massacred, and surrendered Ukrainian soldiers and civilians have been disappeared.
Beyond the brutality, however, there is a story of heroic Ukrainian resistance. That resistance has led to a see-saw conflict in which Russia was pushed back after initial gains.
Russia appears to be trying to consolidate its holdings in eastern Ukraine, in the breakaway Luhansk and Donetsk “People’s Republics.” These are areas Moscow helped to carve out of the besieged country in 2014. Russia would like to conquer more areas around these two secessionist republics, which it recognized in February.
Videos and reports from the front have said that Russia is not only making gains but using withering fire from artillery and other weapon systems to try to break Ukraine’s resistance. The issue Kyiv faces now is that despite the support and weapons it received from the West in the opening days of the war, it now could face troubles at the front. This is because the supply of weapons to Ukraine is not endless. Some of the weapons trickle in.
Weapons to Ukraine
Does Ukraine have enough time to train with the new artillery and anti-tank weapons it received? Is it receiving enough vehicles?
It doesn’t appear to be receiving warplanes. Stories about a crowdfunding campaign to raise $5 million for one more Turkish Bayraktar drone do not seem promising. You can’t crowdfund at that rate for a few drones to be fed piecemeal into the cauldron of conflict.
Why is this happening now?
REPORTS SAY that leaked documents show Germany has not sent the weapons it promised and there are fears that German leader Olaf Scholz is prevaricating in support of Ukraine. Pro-Moscow propaganda is seeping into Germany, Italy and other countries. The narrative coming out now from some European countries is that Ukraine needs to “accept” or “settle for” losing territory. This is based on the argument that “diplomacy is how wars end.”
But 100 days into the war, it is not clear if Moscow might now be able to push forward again. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky has visited troops in the Kharkiv region, on the country's frontline. This is his first major public visit to the front since the war began. Kharkiv is some 230 km. from Severodonetsk, where the Russian offensive is developing.
This false narrative claims that most wars end in a negotiated settlement. These voices assert that countries always have to give up something in negotiations. Oddly, they don’t assert that Russia must give up anything. Instead, their “diplomacy” argument means that the first country to invade and attack can always hang on to illegally occupied territory.
Where have we heard this before?
Most of these voices are of charlatans because when it comes to Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait, they didn’t argue that it had to “give Saddam something to help him save face.” Only with Putin is there the argument that Russia needs to be “given” something so it can climb down and not be “humiliated.” The voices arguing that the West Bank is “occupied” by Israel and that Israel must “withdraw to the 1967 lines,” are the same ones who think that Ukraine should be giving up land to Russia in order to achieve peace.
These voices run a gamut from those who openly support Ukraine, but simply think that diplomacy will end the war, to those who pretend that Russia must be coddled to avoid “nuclear war,” and those who actually back Russia. There are voices now rising in the West who object to Finland and Sweden joining NATO, backed by Ankara’s regime which doesn’t want these two democracies to join the Western defensive alliance. Turkey wants the West to bribe it with guns and let it invade Syria for it to give the “yes” to Helsinki and Stockholm.
Moreover, there are “realists” in the West, some of them linked to the former pro-Iran lobby, who are arguing that the US must force Ukraine to concede something. At the same time though, Washington is sending billions in support to Ukraine. This means it is unclear if the arms deliveries will be enough. If Russia gets a ceasefire, it can interpret as an opening for another invasion in the future. If it feels appeased, it may simply keep attacking.
THESE ARE the questions that now underpin the Ukraine war. While Russia faced stiff resistance when it launched the war, it is now hitting a stride. It knows it faces sanctions, but it is still doing deals, such as new talks with Serbia, to try to get around them. It knows that European support for Ukraine may slow and that US media may not continue to cover the war with the same vigor as in the past. It also knows that having finally defeated the defenders of Mariupol, it has some gains to show for months of war.
The question now is whether the time is on Ukraine’s side. Does it grow stronger every day, while Russia has difficulties replacing its tanks and armaments? If Ukraine isn’t receiving new tanks then how long can it last in a war of attrition on a long frontline where Russian artillery may have some advantages in its eastern region? These are key questions.
Russia
certainly performed badly in the first two months of the war. But it
has reserves and more weapons and an arms industry that can continue to
produce planes and tanks. Can Ukraine also produce tanks, planes and
sophisticated weapons, or must it always rely on these piecemeal
deliveries from the
The upcoming months will tell if Moscow has set a goal to conquer another city or two and then seek a negotiated peace and whether Ukraine will accept such a negotiation without more backing from the West to assure it that Russia won’t start another invasion in a few years.
Please Recommend this page and follow us
No comments:
Post a Comment