We're less than two weeks into the defence of Ukraine, and the demands have both come and started to fade out. Talk of #denazification has given way to just wanting to keep Crimea and letting the two regions go.
However.... 🧵
The EU and NATO are precisely the reason Ukraine has been able to endure this. The idea to commit to never joining them is an odd one, as it boils down do:
"Don't do the one thing that helped you survive our attack".
That's not a bargain anyone in Ukraine would take....
.... Meanwhile, Putin's Russia burns on the world stage. A pariah to all but India and Chinese interests, and even then not "supported" (Abstention in the UN at best).
It's oligarchs targeted, its citizens lives disrupted. Tens of thousands openly protesting daily at home.
Ukraine can make this last as long as it takes, but no - now's not the time to fold.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Let’s play a game. Lets look at a potential scenario where Ukraine falls into the hands of Russian soldiers, after giving an earnest and commendable fight – one for the ages, and we move into the counterinsurgency arena. (1/12)
The reality is that NATO countries won’t intervene in this situation. The umbrella of Article 5 comes with a commensurate inability to go in and help unilaterally, especially given Russia on the other side of it. So lets take a look at some occupations through history. (2/12)
A good starting point is Steven Budiansky’s 2004 article in the WAPost
It turns out that for an extremely belligerent opponent, post-Nazi Germany, a ratio of 2.5 soldiers to every 100 citizens of German was needed. That’s a lot. (3/12)