I would assume that many here at KOS were not alive or old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. A conflict over Russian nukes placed in Cuba brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Some of our own generals argued for nuclear war, thinking we could win such a conflict with “only 10 or 20 million dead.”
Fortunately for the world, Kennedy resisted such madness and both the Russians and the U.S. blinked, although the media/public viewed it as a U.S. victory. It was rumored that JFK’s brother Robert, then Attorney General, had freaked when he asked a general if there was a fallout shelter he could bring his large family to. It was rumored that a general told him that they didn’t have enough room. He had his brother’s ear. President Kennedy stood firm against the generals and a deal was made under which we also removed nukes from Turkey. The point is we set up a direct line between Russia (then the Soviet Union) after that and talked. The fear we all felt then was palpable. I am old enough to remember drills in school hiding under our desks.
The Reality of a Russia/U.S. Conflict Over the Ukraine
There is a geopolitical aspect to the conflict in Ukraine which is undeniable. It hangs over the fate of both the Ukraine and the rest of the world. It cannot be denied and would be folly for anyone to ignore it or the dangers which flow from it. The Russian orbit of power has been shrinking for over 50 years. NATO, which is a military alliance at its core, has expanded and now surrounds the former Soviet Union. Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine was an attempt to take back the Ukraine into the Russian orbit of power on the cheap. They did not expect resistance and viewed the Ukraine as their territory. Virtually all nations outside the Russian orbit of control viewed this with fear and as a threat to other NATO nations.
My point is not to defend Russia, but to understand how this matter can be resolved and to recognize that Western nations and the U.S. have played a less than positive role historically regarding NATO. We are not the “good guys” either when it comes to foreign and geopolitical policy as history demonstrates, even if Putin is rightfully the bad guy in this affair.
Is Military Victory Possible for Ukraine?
It is apparently dogma for some folks here at KOS to believe that a military solution to Putin’s dastardly invasion of the Ukraine can be obtained or should be attempted. Putin, in case some have forgotten, can wreak havoc at some level in the Ukraine for some time and has plenty of nukes, including tactical ones. The Ukrainians unfortunately have plenty of lives to lose. He also has a border with Ukraine and nothing we do or send in the way of weaponry can change that. And he knows that he has already done enough damage to degrade the country’s ability to feed its people and survive the next winter without massive deaths and suffering.
What it less likely is that Putin and his government will survive but his fall cannot be predicted, and no one knows if better or worse will follow him. I have no idea if the Ukrainians can actually succeed in driving the Russians out from reading military reports either here at KOS or in the biased corporate media. But short of Putin’s complete collapse, negotiation with him should not be declared impossible in advance. Both the Ukraine and Russia could easily find themselves in a drawn out Syrian-type war. Yes, Putin is responsible for his war crimes and the invasion of a sovereign nation but blame alone will not resolve this very dangerous situation. Nor will military aid alone to Ukraine likely end this war.
Be Careful What You Wish For
Be careful what you wish for if you’re “all-in” for a total Ukrainian victory and total Russian defeat. Putin is still able to cause widespread devastation even if he’s been largely stymied from achieving anyway near his goals. So, it’s not like he has no negotiating chips to play, or reasons not to negotiate for that matter. The only likely solution which does not lead to the widespread destruction of Ukraine or the risk of world war is a negotiated settlement. Putin has some bargaining chips to play but so does the Ukraine, perhaps more than he does, so we should not escalate to the point that a settlement becomes impossible.
What Chomsky Actually Said
As far as what Chomsky said about Trump, this was completely taken out of context by the right wing. While far from justifying Putin’s invasion, Chomsky quoted Trump because he called for a negotiated settlement, which Chomsky favors. The right-wing news outlets, such as ones like Brietbart, did not quote that he also said Trump was “the Worst Criminal in Human History.” Nor did they mention that a pragmatic Chomsky diverges from some other leftists in his belief in the necessity of voting for mainstream Democrats against Republicans.
Chomsky’s main point, right or wrong or wise or unwise, was that a negotiated settlement is a desirable thing if we can make it happen and was not aimed at praising or trusting Trump.
What Trump Actually Said.
In April Trump said about negotiations: “If they don’t do it soon, there will be nothing left but death, destruction, and carnage. This is a war that never should have happened, but it did. The solution can never be as good as it would have been before the shooting started, but there is a solution, and it should be figured out now—not later—when everyone will be DEAD!”
A statement perhaps fed to him by Putin himself through channels as Trump’s too much of an idiot to think he wrote it himself? If so, it’s not clear that the U.S./Biden wants a negotiated settlement at this point. I am not privy to information that Biden has as to the actual status on the ground in Ukraine but if overtures were made to talk, I hope they are doing just that despite Trump’s statement. The ideas he expressed should not be rejected simply because he said them. There are always dire consequences when there are no talks. Escalation is inevitable. While talks do not guarantee results, not talking suggests a death fight to the finish and draconian losses for the Ukraine.
That said, instead of some of us almost reveling in the battlefield victories of the Ukrainians thanks to U.S. weaponry, we should consider their massive sacrifices and the loss of life being inflicted on them, which has no end in sight. The war will not likely end soon, and Putin has maintained control of his police state. It’s time to stop the escalations and negotiate a settlement, upon which NEITHER side will get everything they want.
Pre-conditions if obtainable can be useful but should not be required to talk. It would be great if Putin falls and that helps solve the problem. But should we back the Ukraine to the point that we escalate the conflict beyond where it can be controlled? We saw how long the war in Vietnam took to play itself out. This, more than Afghanistan, is Russia’s/Putin’s Vietnam. The violence we were using in Vietnam escalated to near genocidal levels and the war expanded to surrounding countries. Only a strong anti-war movement and fears of a Soviet response kept the U.S. from using tactical nuclear weapons. Every other manner of war crime was committed. We escalated carpet bombing in a final effort after the military could no longer trust rebellious troops. Do we want this for the Ukraine?
Do we doubt that Putin in desperation may try something similar? It’s clear that Putin cannot win. But it is doubtful that Ukraine can either, even with U.S. support. Some will no doubt argue that any compromise with Putin is equivalent to appeasement. Putin is an authoritarian tyrant, but his agenda should not be compared to Hitler’s as some have. The Nazis had already built a huge army by 1939 and sought world conquest. Putin has no such capability today as his invasion demonstrated and Chomsky is not Neville Chamberlain preaching appeasement. Sure, Putin’s army might collapse, or he might be assassinated, but only after a lot more Ukrainians are killed.
It’s a likely safe bet that Putin will eventually fall, with his weaknesses well exposed, even if some compromises are made. But few have considered is that if Putin falls who if anyone controls and secures their nukes? The resulting power struggle could empower worse that even he was. So why not make a realistic attempt at negotiations and save Ukraine from more destruction and prevent a much wider and more devastating consequences?