When I see reports of Assad sending thousands of troops to support Putin's campaign of war crimes in Ukraine or of the use of Wagner Group mercenaries or Russia's bringing in some of their most brutal veterans of Chechnya...
...or of the Kremlin employing other approaches drawn from their prior violations of international law in Chechnya, Syria, Georgia, Crimea & Eastern Ukraine, I can't help but think of the role bad U.S. and Western policy decisions played in making this catastrophe possible.
Not holding Putin to account in the past, not standing up to him in the past, not respecting our own "red lines" in the past, & of course, having one POTUS who actively did Putin's bidding to help Russia, weaken Ukraine and weaken NATO, definitely helped set the stage for this.
So, of course, did European inertia & of their longstanding patter of putting commercial interests ahead of national security imperatives. Collectively the West (& the last three presidencies...most notably Trump's) did not do enough, did not show enough foresight or moral fiber.
But having said that, the primary responsibility for the current war, the atrocities taking place, and for the past wars that led us here lies with Putin and then, next, with war criminal collaborators like Assad.
In fact, of all the mistakes the West made, the gravest was failing to realize the profundity of the threat posed by Putin and for consistently trying to rationalize, normalize or just forget his behavior.
One would think the scale of the horrors perpetrated by Putin in Ukraine would ensure that collectively the int'l community never makes that mistake again. But then you would have thought that turning Grozny to dust or the savaging of Syria would have had that effect before.
That is one of my greatest concerns here. That we fall victim to our impulse to too quickly turn the page, our unwillingness to tackle the really tough problems of holding a world leader like Putin accountable, that we just want to put this all behind us.
Peace as soon as possible is a mercy we must all seek for the innocents of Ukraine. But how we resolve this must also take into account the lesson of two decades of experience with Putin and centuries of experience with similarly bloodthirsty despots.
That lesson: Criminals who are not held to account will continue to commit crimes, enemies who are not acknowledged as such and defeated will always remain a threat.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Despite the pundit/Twitter debate, nearly 80% say working with allies re: Ukraine has been the right approach, 85% strongly or somewhat favor maintaining strict economic sanctions, 77% strongly or somewhat favor large US force presence near Ukraine... pewrsr.ch/3q6ZXoW
...and nearly 7 in 10 strongly or somewhat favor admitting large numbers of Ukrainian refugees to the US. Tellingly, despite these numbers, when asked whether they support Biden's policies on the war, they "only" favor him by a 47% to 39% margin.
In other words they overwhelmingly support Biden's policies but won't say so if they're defined in political terms. (This is often true--polls show vast majorities of Americans support most Biden/Dem agenda domestic agenda items, but that doesn't translate into polling results...
Henry Kissinger used to joke that he would present Nixon with three alternatives on foreign policy issues: global thermonuclear war, complete capitulation and the one he wanted to do. I'm feeling a lot of that vibe in much of the Ukraine analysis I'm reading.
There's a lot of we need a fig leaf for Putin so we don't have a nuclear war or we don't dare escalate because it would risk a nuclear war...or on the other hand, risking nuclear war is no biggie cause he probably won't do it and we'd probably win and that'd show 'em.
The reality is there is probably more escalation we can do without risking a nuclear war and the best off-ramp for Putin is defeating him (though it is up to Ukraine to determine what endgame they seek here...they are the ones suffering, sacrificing & at risk.)
This morning on @Morning_Joe@JoeNBC asked me, and I'm paraphrasing, what it was going to take for the West to defend Ukraine, to step up and defend the innocent people of that country from slaughter at the hands of the Russians. I offered up a pretty standard answer.
I said we would ramp up military aid and so on but that it would take crossing a lot of red lines to get us to act. Sometimes discussions on TV shows just stream by, questions come and answers go and we move on. But I have to say, this question haunts me.
Because letting Ukrainians die is horrific and unjust. The story of the past century is of slaughters and genocides that occurred because the political and military calculus was that the cost of intervention was too high, too risky. And every one of those answers seemed right...
Putin likely knows he cannot win in Ukraine in the sense that he cannot take control of the country and maintain that control. He cannot make Ukraine a vassal state like Belarus. So, it seems likely that for him, the next best option is to destroy Ukraine with maximum brutality.
In so doing, he will be able to say he neutralized Ukraine's threat to Russia. He will send a warning to neighbors that this is what awaits them if he sees them as a threat. And perhaps most importantly, he will send a message to the world that he can act w/complete impunity.
What awaits Ukraine is almost certainly worse than anything we have seen to date. Re: the last point above, Putin will cross red lines to prove that he can do so. He likely believes that communicates a message of power to his people and to the world.
The leader of the GOP did not embrace Putin (or other despots) out of ignorance. He knew what they did. And he admired it. He would "joke" he wished he could brutalize the press like they did. He wanted to suppress dissent like they did. He wanted to shoot peaceful protestors...
...and send in the 82d Airborne division against BLM protestors. He defended right wing thugs. He encouraged people at his rallies to use violence against those with political views. He welcomed and defended Russian attacks on our democracy.
Trump tried to block sanctions against Russia for its abuses and railed furiously when they were imposed against Russia for using chemical weapons against Putin's enemies in the UK. Trump promoted a coup against American democracy.
For those who suggest that the greatest deterrent to Russia chemical weapons use (or similar violation) in Ukraine is that Putin would immediately and forever be seen as a pariah, please see history. Russia is already an established user & enabler of chemical weapons use.
In Syria. Against its enemies. And that compounded with the wanton brutality of Russia from Chechnya to Syria to Ukraine, its use of banned munitions from cluster bombs to thermobaric weapons, and its brutality against its own citizens, should tell you all you need to know.
Putin has already established he is immune to global condemnation, has no concern for international laws or conventions and sees his cruelty as a useful tool in advancing his ambitions. The only way to stop him is to defeat him. It is not to shame or condemn him.