Ukraine, Victory or Appeasement

The original post from Sept 2024 has been updated Nov 2024

Support for Ukraine has been a contentious issue leading into this year’s presidential election. What Trump does once in office will determine Ukraine’s ability to protect its sovereignty and control the outcome of the conflict.  The stakes are so high and our decision so impactful to the outcome, that everyone needs to understand the consequences of our actions. We are not in uncharted waters; history shows the missed opportunities and mistakes made on the road to WWII. The post war mistakes after the war of 1870 and WWI, directly lead to reigniting the old conflicts. Victory, defeat, or a negotiated resolution may not be the end if we don’t get this right.

I don’t see history as repeating itself, but in war I see history as a playbook. It only appears to be repeated because the methods in previous successes are employed once again. If we can understand the sad history of appeasement and its consequences, we can see into Putin’s playbook.

There were several missed opportunities to stop the globalist expansion dreams of Hitler long before he invaded Poland. During the 1930s, the governments of France and England were somewhat dysfunctional. Hitler surmised correctly on several points, infighting in their governments would stall decisions, they had lost their will to fight, and if Germany invaded their neighbors, they would not honor their treaties of protection. The first opportunity to change the course of history was lost with their inaction when Hitler annexed Austria and then Sudetenland. He did this under the pretense of safety for the German populations living within their borders. Even though France and England, at the time, had military superiority they gave little resistance due to their policy of appeasement. Had they mobilized troops, just the threat of war against Germany had a very good chance of ending Hitler’s reign and Germanys desire for expansion. The next blunder of appeasement was the Munich Agreement. [1] This became the death sentence for the remaining territory of Czechoslovakia. Their thinking was surely Germanys expansion desires were satisfied. Hitler quickly broke that agreement. Other countries clearly understood that no one would be coming to their aid. With a threat of total annihilation Germany was able to absorb into its sphere of influence many territories without firing a single shot. When Poland refused to capitulate it was to late, Germany had the industries, materials, and manufacturing to procure a protracted war. WWII official began when Hitler invaded Poland. [2]

Russia has used the same language as Hitler, taking territory from Ukraine under the guise of security for the Russians living within their borders. Like the French and English before us, we missed an opportunity to stop Putin’s expansionism when he attacked and claimed Crimea. The inaction of the global community including America and European countries was based on the broad opinion that Russia’s expansion desires were satisfied. If we had offered any resistance at that time, would we be where we are today? Russia’s recent assault to capture most if not all of Ukraine follows the same gamble that Hitler had taken, That NATO has no will or legal obligation to fight, foreign governments were in disarray, Ukraine has no strategical or economic value to other nations.  His half hearted invasion testifies to this thought process. Russia anticipated that in just a few weeks, Ukraine would be abandoned and would capitulate to save its land and population from destruction. The speed and strength of the western coalition surprised Putin. Had we not placed restrictions on the delivery of weapons systems and their usage once delivered Putin may have looked for a way to walk back his commitment to the so-called police action. Now politically committed to the war, retreat for him is not an option. For Putin to acknowledge his miscalculation could lead to the end of his control of power. I see two options; Putin’s regime is toppled or a peace deal with land concessions so Putin can justify his assault on Ukraine with his own population. For now, his only choice is to stay in the fight and hope that the coalition will fall apart or the new administration in January will be more favorable to concessions or halt support completely.

A negotiated peace deal involving territorial concessions contains a greater danger of reigniting the conflict in the future. Putin’s nose is bloody, his popularity at home diminished, his regime under threat from within. We are once again finding ourselves at a Munich Agreement moment. Any negotiated territory concessions would be the lifeline Putin desperately needs. He would harvest the resources of his newly gained territory to improve conditions in Russia, securing his continuation in power. Make no misgivings, he would take brutal revenge on the Ukrainian population. The troubled history of Russia and Ukraine gives us a window into what this could look like. Known as the Holodomor, [3] years prior and up to the start of WWII the Russian Empire was cleansing Ukrainian territory. Murder and starvation took the lives of 3.9 million Ukrainians, replacing the population vacuum with Russian citizens. Ukrainians know this history and they would flee territories taken by Russia in mass numbers. Launching yet another humanitarian crisis as millions try to cross the border before it closes. Smaller countries in the region, aware that no one will be coming to their aid, would capitulate when threatened with total destruction. Moldovia, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania, 3 which are NATO members but all former soviet satellites with a substantial Russian population, simplifying the process of absorption into the Russian sphere of influence. A weakened NATO may not honor their commitments against small territory gains. Once completed, he would return to his obsession regarding Ukraine. With control on three of Ukraine’s borders, Putin’s move on the remainder of Ukraine will be swift, relentless and brutal. Poland, with its own troubled history with Rusia, has already begun to reinforce its eastern border in anticipation of a complete Russian takeover of Ukraine. History shows us that isolationist policies failed to protect us. WWI and WWII came to us anyway with devastating consequences. Then as today, the earlier the aggression is met the chance of escalation into a world conflict is reduced.  If we fail to rise to today’s challenge, we will find ourselves facing a stronger, smarter Russia. Other countries with expansionists desires will scrutinize the reliability of NATO and/or the West to stay the course and act on it accordingly.

Did the Budapest Agreement in the mid-1990s set the stage for Ukraine’s fate today? Upon the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine found itself near the top of nuclear powers with a substantial number of nuclear warheads. Concerned about the proliferation of nuclear weapons, United States, Great Britton, and Russia, gave assurances of protection to Ukraine under the Budapest Agreement. [4] Ukraine agreed to the deal and returned its nuclear arsenal to Russia. In 2014 Russia broke the agreement and invaded Crimea without significant consequences. Ukraine may be wondering if their decision to return the nuclear weapons was the correct one. If we concede Ukraine to Russia then every country, big and small, will see a nuclear weapon as their only chance at sovereignty.

Putin can look upon Hitler’s successes with expansionism and hope to repeat them. We can look upon France and England’s mistakes of appeasement and hope we do not repeat them.

Although the importance of funding should not be diminished, it should not be a condition in determining if support for Ukraine is the correct thing to do. Going into the complexity of funding would distract from the content presented here. Once we decide to lend our support, or not, then we can decide how and how much to finance it. But this is for post on another day.

FYI Not all the funds go to Ukraine. It’s important to remember that US and coalition members’ contributions include billions that go directly back into their own communities. This stepped-up military manufacturing is having a positive effect on many US cities. Still billions go to support the Ukrainian government.

1 Munich Agreement – Wikipedia

2  World War II – Wikipedia

3 Holodomor | Facts, Definition, & Death Toll | Britannica

4 Budapest Memorandum – Wikipedia                                                   

If you are interested in learning more about the Holodomor, I recommend “Red Famine” by Anne Applebaum