2022 has already seen Russia invade Ukraine and China may follow suit and invade Taiwan. Both invasions come at the invitation of American weakness watched by the world when the Taliban took Afghanistan. The fall of Afghanistan and American bug out demonstrated incompetence as well as cowardice over commitment.
Russia and China know they can green light their respective invasions and probably gain every military victory and political objective they want. Yet, there is enough uncertainty to make either invasion a high stakes gamble on nuclear war.
When Russia Invades Ukraine. Russia took back Crimea in 2014 and violated the treaty where the U.S. promised to keep the territorial integrity of the Ukraine in exchange for them giving up the nuclear weapons they inherited at the collapse of the Soviet Union. The U.S. didn’t roll back the invasion. Frankly, I have no problem with that.
Catherine the Great conquered Crimea for Russia – fair and square a long time ago.
Catherine the Great annexed Crimea in 1783. It was the same year the new nation – called the American Empire by Ben Franklin and other Founding Fathers – won its war of independence. Two Great Powers were growing and expanding. The Russians pushed the borders of bloody Islam back. The Americans pushed back indigenous Neolithic tribes, old colonial power claims, and Mexico.
The Russians made Crimea Russian. Nikita Khrushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine in 1954. But, he didn’t change the people. The majority remained Russian. The Russians want to be part of Russia, not Ukraine. So, what’s the problem with self-determination and majority rule?
Since Russia has been an autocracy for 1,000 years, it isn’t a surprise if enterprising politicians, enter Putin, restore autocracy.
Russia is a Great Power. They have legitimate interests for Russians who are on the wrong side of borders since the fall of the Soviet Empire. If Russians are actually the majority in some Oblasts, what is the problem in secession – based on self-determination? Should there be a plebiscite?
Russians are already fighting Ukrainians in the eastern Oblasts.
If Russia only takes the Oblasts and settles into a long war with Ukrainians unhappy with that move, that’s one thing.
If Russia conquers all of Ukraine for an object lesson, will it quickly withdraw and “Finlandize” it or occupy it? That invites a long, long awful war. It may lead NATO allies in the East to offer sanctuary and military support, which invites new Russian attacks, which could bring all of NATO and the U.S. in an Article 5 defense of a NATO country.
Russia is driving all the risks. If they calculate well, they win. Usually, though, wars change as soon as the dogs of war are unleashed. Wars create unique circumstances and dynamics. Awful things happen.
Let’s hope the Putin’s appetite is quickly filled. Because hope is our only strategy at this time. The Biden Administration is as feckless as it is clueless.
And politicians from both parties gutted the Army after the Cold War and reduced it further as soon as the optempo in the Middle East slowed, so there is no Seventh U.S. Army in Europe. If there was a U.S. Field Army there, it would be a completely different situation.
When China invades Taiwan. The People’s Liberation Army has been practicing invading Taiwan for decades. When they do, they’ll violate the U.S. bilateral defense treaty with Taiwan. If the U.S. turns tail on that treaty, every U.S. treaty and alliance becomes worthless. Including NATO.
If the Biden Administration signals we won’t fight, then it may be like Secretary of State Acheson saying Korea was outside our U.S. security perimeter. The North Koreans attacked six months later. But, to their surprise we went to war.
If we do the same blunder and response with China, they have nuclear weapons that can reach the U.S. And, and undetermined number of hyper velocity missiles for which we have no stated defense.
Let us hope the Chinese don’t see it in their interests, perhaps based on our intertwined economies, to invade.
If they do attack, the U.S. Navy is as likely to be sunk protecting Taiwan by an overmatch of Chinese missiles as it is to defeat the invasion. Size, as in numbers, matters.
It’s often said that “Hope isn’t a strategy.” Unfortunately, as long as there is a Biden Administration, hope may be our only strategy.
Follow AFNN:
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAz…
Twitter: @AFNNUSA
GETTR: @AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
Patriot.Online: @AFNN
“If Russians are actually the majority in some Oblasts, what is the problem in secession – based on self-determination? ”
I would not call Russia invading Ukraine self determination, and definitely not call it secession. If that was the case, when Kruschev gave up the territory, known as “The Ukraine” by Stalin and Kruschev, and allowed it to become an independent sovereign country, why didn’t all those “Russians” in Ukraine object, at that time? Were those former Russians, in those particular Oblasts, the ones who started this fight? That is something I am not certain of, but I suspect it is not the case.
“Russia is a Great Power. They have legitimate interests for Russians who are on the wrong side of borders since the fall of the Soviet Empire.”
I submit that Russia gave up their right to make any claim on behalf of those former Russians who remained in Ukraine, when Kruschev gave away the territory, which means that those in Ukraine are Ukrainians, unless you are willing to accept that former slaves imported from Africa to the US are still Africans, who, along with all their off springs, are US citizens, who are now supposedly Americans.
When it comes down to who was there first, what happens to a sovereign country? I think that is best left up to the people who were invaded, Ukraine, and if they are willing to fight for their country, I sure won’t stand in the way. In fact, if it is in our best interest to aid Ukraine, by some measure, we should do so, not necessarily by sending troops, but by aiding them with munition, or whatever our interests demand.
We have our Monroe Doctrine. Could it just be that Ukraine has their version? After all, the idea of a sovereign nation, which is what Ukraine is as qualified to be as the United States, or Russia, for that matter, seems as applicable to one as the other. That doctrine is just as applicable as it was for us, as it is for them. It may not be their Doctrine, but it is an idea that has no bounds.
This war has nothing to do with nation-building, from our perspective, but it is all about.
Unfortunately, like you said, about hope not being much of a strategy, we are stuck with a bad civilian leader and are going to be stuck with hope as the strategy. Perhaps another US president would be left with a better outlook. We are stuck with what we have. We have our opinions, whether they are convenient or not. I still have more questions than answers.
“but it is about the rights of a sovereign nation to be able to defend itself.”
That should be the last sentence in the next to last paragraph. Unable to edit. Sorry.