Here is the simple, hard-hitting, inconvenient truth.
The minute Western leaders so much as entertained the idea of Russia keeping any of the lands it has illegally occupied was the minute the international order collapsed and Russia won its most important victory. ⬇️
The minute Western leaders so much as entertained the idea of Russia keeping any of the lands it has illegally occupied was the minute the international order collapsed and Russia won its most important victory. ⬇️
The minute those who insisted on full liberation of Ukrainian territories were called “maximalists” was the minute three dangerous ideas won:
1. It is acceptable to change borders by force;
2. It is acceptable to try to annihilate another nation;
3. Sovereignty is not absolute.⬇️
1. It is acceptable to change borders by force;
2. It is acceptable to try to annihilate another nation;
3. Sovereignty is not absolute.⬇️
It is tempting to think that this is the principle of nuclear-armed superpowers being able to do what they can and all others having to suffer what they must. Except this isn’t quite true. The new principle is rather more specific: nuclear-armed Russia can do as it pleases.⬇️
Think about how the “nuclear-armed” West has behaved. It has been reactive, weak, and unwilling to project the power it has. Power, however, isn’t like a bank deposit, just staying there if you don’t use it. If you fail to use it, power dissipates.⬇️
In a very real sense then, we have become the co-authors of Russian aggression and the guarantors of the right of the imperial conqueror to keep what it has conquered.
Our word is, indeed, quite solid: the implicit promise that Russia will face no meaningful consequences.⬇️
Our word is, indeed, quite solid: the implicit promise that Russia will face no meaningful consequences.⬇️
But isn’t it impossible/Quixotic/dangerous to consider and to advocate the liberation of all Ukrainian territories?
If it is now, we made it so. It was all of possible, realistic, reasonable and imperative of us to never yield even an implicit acquiescence in this travesty.
If it is now, we made it so. It was all of possible, realistic, reasonable and imperative of us to never yield even an implicit acquiescence in this travesty.
There is a hierarchy of priorities in the responsible international community just as there is one in an individual life. There are things not worth defending to the last.
And then there are things that we must never, not once yield on because doing so is suicidal.
And then there are things that we must never, not once yield on because doing so is suicidal.
You may yield on whether you end up living in a small or a large house. You may not ever yield on, say, giving up one of your kids, your spouse and parents for the promise of being allowed to live. Because making that choice is a guaranteed forfeiture of your own life.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
