Comments by "Tim Trewyn" (@timtrewyn453) on "Jeffrey Sachs - The Only Hope for Peace In Ukraine" video.
-
1
-
Anything left of Ukraine is likely to become more militarized if it is not a part of NATO, and Russia should consider that. European NATO countries have generally underspent on defense because they have NATO. I thought Russia wanted Ukraine less militarized. Given Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a Ukrainian arms buildup is just common sense going forward. Left out of the commentary here has been Ukrainian public opinion. I'm not aware a majority of the Ukrainian people were ready to take the deal in April 2022, but Ukrainian agency is often underrated. My Ukrainian friend told me, "We don't want Russian mind control." Boris Johnson represented a struggling British economy and here comes Zelensky, not joyfully announcing he has a deal with Putin, but representing a people ready to fight for their country (and obviously a lot of them have). It's a Russian rhetorical twist (which they are experts at, obviously) to characterize that exchange as British imperialism rather than a courageous statement of support for justice amidst stress. Zelensky did not want the deal, but he knew he needed Western support going forward and he had to ask for it and get it or he would need to take that deal, bad as it was. And why would Ukraine have any confidence in an impotent UN security guarantee or even a US security guarantee given the fickleness of the American voters as a whole, Trump or no Trump? The nations Ukraine would sensibly turn to for alliance would be such as Poland, the Baltics, and Finland. They all have a large stake in this fight. And fortunately for Ukraine, the nations to the west also show some support and would probably be open to forming a new alliance that has agency without dependence on the US or other European nations who have swung to the Russian side.
The forfeiture of decent values here is appalling. The submission to Russian depravity is appalling. It should cost Russia something in any deal. If territorial concessions are needed to end the war, Russia should not be at all surprised that it will face a more united and militarized set of nations on its border and even a more united and militarized Europe that is SUPERIOR to Russia in the practical (non-nuclear) metrics Russia leans on to assert Ukrainian defense is futile. The US may lift its sanctions, but Europe is unlikely to return to the level of economic empowerment of Russia it was making before. Europe is going to continue to move away from fossil fuels, not only to mitigate climate change, but to reduce its dependence on Russian oil and gas. That Russia is shifting its business plan to market minerals it has seized by murderous force in Ukraine all the more reveals its depravity. Russia will have to look elsewhere to build the strength it needs to deter China from reclaiming historically Chinese lands.
Russia knows if Europe leans into this conflict more than it has then it knows its prospects are not good. Small victories on the battlefield are no substitute for a healthy economy, decent morale in the population, and friendly relations with a wide range of trading partners. The loss of Russia's client in Syria, the collapse of Cuban electrical service, and the unwillingness of China (the unlimited friend) to assist Russia in a quick occupation of the entirety of Ukraine shed doubt on the notion that Russia is winning strategically. What the narrative reveals is the Russian leadership's need to believe it is winning, something the West has used to weaken Russia strategically. The Soviets had a similar narrative of innocence, infallibility, and infinite resources. It was a paradigm that led to self-defeat. Putin is behaving like a Soviet in that sense.
Would Professor Sachs say he is thoroughly aware of how Russia influences people, and that he has immunized himself?
1