Peace for Ukraine

For John, BLUF:  This is a few days late, but the problem persists and the need is there.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The growing chorus for peace in Ukraine

Here is the sub-headline:

There is an alternative.  We can and must resolve this conflict through peaceful diplomacy and negotiation, to end the killing and destruction and let the people of Ukraine live in peace.

From Nation of Change, by CODEPINK Members Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies, 31 October 2022.

Here is the lede plus three:

Ukraine has been wracked by shocking destruction and deadly violence since Russia invaded the country in February. Estimates of the death toll range from a confirmed minimum of 27,577 people, including 6,374 civilians, to over 150,000.  The slaughter can only get more horrific as long as all sides, including the United States and its NATO allies, remain committed to war.

In the first weeks of the war, the United States and NATO countries sent weapons to Ukraine to try to prevent Russia from quickly defeating Ukraine’s armed forces and conducting a U.S.-style “regime change” in Kyiv.  But since that goal was achieved, the only goals that President Zelenskyy and his Western allies have publicly proclaimed are to recover all of pre-2014 Ukraine and decisively defeat and weaken Russia.

These are aspirational goals at best, which require sacrificing hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of Ukrainian lives, regardless of the outcome.  Even worse, if they should come close to succeeding, they are likely to trigger a nuclear war, making this the all-time epitome of a “no-win predicament.”  At the end of May, President Biden responded to probing questions about the contradictions in his Ukraine policy from the New York Times Editorial Board, replying that the United States was sending weapons so that Ukraine “can fight on the battlefield and be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.”

But when Biden wrote that, Ukraine had no position at any negotiating table, thanks mainly to the conditions that Biden and NATO leaders attached to their support.  In April, after Ukraine negotiated a15-point peace plan for a ceasefire, a Russian withdrawal and a peaceful future as a neutral country, the United States and United Kingdom refused to provide Ukraine with the security guarantees that were a critical part of the agreement.

Regarding the headline, I don't hear this growing cry.  Yes, on Democracy Now and some parts of the GOP, but not across the Democratic Party or the Nation as a whole.  Should we be striving for peace?  Absolutely.  For the People of Ukraine, and for the rest of us, who suffer the knock on effects of war, such as grain and oil shortages.

As Mr Fred Iklé says, Every War must end.  What we creatively need is a peace proposal that does not back one party or another into a corner, from which they will fight for survival.  While there are issues of justice to be considered, they should not overwhelm the political issues.  For example, while I might think that President Putin deserves punishment for starting the latest military phase of this war, that is not as important to me as finding an exit ramp that would allow Mr Putin to pull back without plunging Russia into a coup or revolution, which would be a reason for Mr Putin to not go there.  There is no King Solomon here.  We have to work it out ourselves.

Don't count on the United Nations to solve this.  The various nations are going to have to agree to treaty boundaries and reparations and other nations are going to have to offer up guarantees, which means enforcement against violations.  Which we would hope would work this time, unlike the Budapest Memoorandum of 1994.

Regards  —  Cliff