I usually agree with the members of the Progressive Caucus who signed the letter to Biden on Ukraine, but this letter is worse than useless. It will have the opposite of its intended effect. Here's why: 1/x
2/x far from shortening the war, I view it as a certainty that this letter will make its way to Russian state media within the next day or two as evidence of fracturing solidarity among politicians in Biden's own party for his support of Ukraine.
3/x it will further encourage Putin that his long-term strategy of keeping the war going until US domestic resolve breaks or a Putin-friendly politician wins the presidency is viable, and Russian propaganda media will work overtime to convince the public that it is viable.
4/x to further this fracturing, Russia will attempt to continue to disrupt global energy supplies and Ukrainian food exports, because the Progressive Caucus just told Putin that these things were creating domestic pressure in the United States.
5/x The letter just told Putin and Lavrov that their strategy is working. They now have incentive to conduct further atrocities in Ukraine, do even more damage to global supply chains, and keep that war machine going as long as they can.
6/6 the Progressive Caucus members thought they were trying to shorten the war. But if anything, they just prolonged it It was a baffling, severe foreign policy blunder that risks long-term consequences.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with 🕷Dante Atkins🕷

🕷Dante Atkins🕷 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DanteAtkins

Oct 26
I do a lot of threads about nuclear posture and war, but I want to do a thread about diplomacy., because a lot of people saying "we need to negotiate with Putin" seem to think that diplomacy is a button you hit on Civ III, as opposed to the "war" button. And...no. Let's go. 1/x
2/x the first thing that needs to be resolved is how many nations get to be a party to the talks in the first place. Obviously, these talks would involve the US, Ukraine, and Russia, but other nations have a huge stake as well. Poland, Moldova, Western European countries...
3/x so that's the first thing. Who's participating? The second thing is the format, and there's a lot to go over on that front. First off, will this be cabinet level or head of government level? Second, will this be an in-person summit? Third, if so, where?
Read 22 tweets
Oct 25
Over at the American Prospect, Harold Meyerson just asked "what's the endgame" in Ukraine, as if there is no answer to that. But it's a really weird time to be asking that question while Ukraine is pressing a relatively rapid counteroffensive.
The "endgame" is full Ukrainian sovereignty, which is not only the moral outcome, but also conveys ancillary geopolitical benefits for multilateralism and democracy over realism and autocracy.
It would be one thing if the situation on the ground were an intractable stalemate, but that is not the case. Ukraine has made major breakthroughs and is on the verge of making even bigger ones.
Read 7 tweets
Oct 25
I actually need to get to work, so a few last thoughts. Why did the orgs who want Ukraine to concede their territory and foreign policy decide to engage in this subterfuge against the Progressive Caucus now? Here's my speculation.
The outcome they actually want is Ukrainian concessions in order to achieve a faster peace. Now, some may want that for risk mitigation--okay--but some actually want that because they want to see the US and NATO lose, because that's their definition of "anti-imperialism."
The better Ukraine does on the battlefield--especially with success on the horizon in Kherson and Luhansk--the less likely that outcome is. First, it theoretically elevates risk, and second, it further bolsters the influence of the US and NATO. Not a good outcome for them!
Read 6 tweets
Oct 25
Now that the letter from the Progressive Caucus has been withdrawn, there remains the question of how such a massive foreign policy blunder occurred in the first place, and I think the answer lies in the organizations that are still heavily promoting it. 1/x
2/x Just Foreign Policy is one such, but it seems to me that another organization deeply enmeshed in this is the Quincy Institute, and it seems clear that some sympathetic members worked with them to update the letter with no vetting and push it out.
3/x now, the Progressive Caucus and its members may claim that they have no intention of undermining Ukrainian sovereignty or demanding a negotiation that cedes territorial concessions from Ukraine. But the Quincy Institute? That's not their line.
Read 12 tweets
Oct 25
I want to be clear about this dishonest, atrocious article from Ryan Grim. I'm going to link to it so you can read an opposing viewpoint to my thread, even if it gives bullshit more traffic.

theintercept.com/2022/10/25/hou…
so let's take a look at it. First, on Ryan Grim himself. He blocked me before the war began, apparently because I issued critiques of his glib, immoral position that if Russia did invade Ukraine, he saw no point in "endangering himself" by the US getting involved. Solidarity!
We already know from Ryan's position before the war that if it were up to him, Ukraine could just be conquered and its civilians brutalized for all he cares, because it's not his problem. You can ask @atrupar about that exchange. It was hideous.
Read 15 tweets
Oct 25
I'm not a hawk. Far from it. But diplomacy requires two willing partners, and a diplomatic resolution that is acceptable to the United States and to Ukraine requires Putin to admit defeat on the biggest gamble of his tenure. He won't do that just because you asked nicely. 1/x
2/x If you are going to get Putin to admit defeat on his most cherished political objective--reintegrating Ukraine into the Russian empire--you'll have to do that from a position of strength, not a position of weakness or desperation. Here's what that looks like in practice:
3/x "Putin, NATO and sympathetic countries will keep on providing Ukraine with economic, logistical, and military assistance. You have already lost this war on military terms, and you will not starve or freeze Ukraine into submission, nor intimidate the world into backing down."
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(