Ukraine: An Idea for Peace

[Sukla Sen]

An Idea for Peace:

<<I think NATO elites understand that the no-fly zone over Ukraine would mean a war between NATO and Russia. I don’t think we can afford to take our chances when it comes to risking a nuclear apocalypse.

Stopping the war is the absolute priority. This might be possible by immediately giving Ukraine a clear perspective on joining the EU, at least a concrete membership plan. At the same time, an agreement on military neutrality could be reached. This is easier now, because president Volodymyr Zelensky and the rest of the political elite are disappointed that NATO will not help Ukraine or establish a no-fly zone.

Zelensky will be forced to accept painful compromises over Crimea and Donbas. But thanks to EU membership, Zelensky could present the agreement with Russia as a victory and claim that the Ukrainians won what they have been fighting for since the revolution on Maidan Square. At the same time, Putin could also claim that he was not defeated, that the invasion met its goals. The EU and the United States should negotiate something like this if they want to prevent the loss of Ukrainian lives and the destruction of the economy.>>

(Excerpted from: <https://jacobinmag.com/2022/03/russia-ukraine-war-invasion-left-putin-outcomes?mc_cid=b1fe9b1fde&mc_eid=f132bcf674>.)

[Sukla Sen]

Hi Sekhar,

Guess, the quote that I produced here has two dimensions: one, the specific terms for "peace" and, the second, why "peace"?

I. The specific terms which have been peddled here are (i) grant the EU membership to Ukraine, or at the very least a very doable roadmap, (ii) promise and ensure its military neutrality and (iii) formally concede Donbas and Crimea to Russia which have, in any case, been already annexed by it.

But then, what happens to the economic sanctions?

Logically, they'd go. For as the NATO won't get directly involved - come what may, that's the only thing it can offer to Putin in return for "peace", which Putin doesn't already have.

II. As regards why peace, there's no confusion whatever.

Putin is an uncontrollable rogue - capable of annihilating one and all and, hence, "peace" is a dire necessity - on negotiated terms, as favourable as possible.

Evidently, that's not exactly a "moral" argument. In fact, no claim is made to that effect. Of course, one may query whether the objective of hugely minimising loss of human lives and economic assets is in itself "moral" enough? 

The point is whether it's even practical?

What happens if you once submit to the bully? Quite likely - even if not most certainly, it'd only further encourage it and boost its bullying ways.

But then, what's the alternative available?

Even without the use of nuclear weapons, Ukraine is being relentlessly pulverised. No doubt, Ukraine is fighting back with amazing grit, but, that just can't go on for ever. The only other way the invasion may come to an end is the ouster of Putin via, some sort of, domestic revolt. At least as of now there's no indication that it could happen anytime soon, if at all.

And that Putin, all said and done, an autocrat, may use the tactical nuclear weapons - to begin with, in the belief that even then the NATO won't respond, in similar rems, is now being assessed to be quite a possibility.

(As regards Mao, his designating atom bomb as "a paper tiger" didn't, in the slightest, deter him from striving all-out to become a nuclear weapons state, at the very earliest. In fact, the oft-repeated slogan night have even had worked as a necessary camouflage. China had carried out its first trial explosion in October '64, twenty two years before Mao's death. Suspect, the slogan fell into disuse post that.)

So, under the circumstances, there're many takers for "peace".

In fact, Zelensky, regardless of all his incredible bravery, is constantly negotiating with the invader the terms of a ceasefire.

Sukla

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022, 20:19 Sekhar Ramakrishnan <sek...@caa.columbia.edu> wrote:

So, Sukla, is this how nuclear blackmail works? Can the next madman (Kim? Modi?) try the same tactic to get what he wants?

The Jacobin interviewee says stuff like "the West knew about the invasion and didn’t do enough to prevent it," making me wonder if the horrors he is witnessing are affecting his logic. But I'll focus on "Putin could also claim that he was not defeated." Will this person be so kind if Rwanda invades Burundi claiming oppression of Tutsis, kills a few thousand civilians and razes some towns to the ground? My question is, why should the invader and war criminal be allowed to save face? Is there any reason other than nuclear blackmail?

Leave aside Kim and Modi, what will stop Putin himself from trying this again? We know already, from the horse's mouth, that recreating Tsarist Russia is the goal, not just Donbas and Crimea, which had already been taken over. 

The fact that Putin has managed to keep his population from learning the truth here makes all the more important a proper reckoning for his war crimes; else, he will still have his population behind him in his next war.

As for the nuclear blackmail, I prefer to believe in Mao's paper tiger theory; the alternative is more horror like we're witnessing now.

Regards, Sekhar 

_______________________________________________
Foil-l mailing list
Foi...@insaf.net
http://insaf.net/mailman/listinfo/foil-l_insaf.net

[Sukla Sen]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: 'Rohini Hensman' via Free Binayak Sen 
Date: Thu, Mar 24, 2022, 20:40
Subject: Re: [foil] Ukraine: An Idea for Peace

I think Ishchenko has been outside Ukraine for so long that he has lost touch with it - that's why he is so surprised by the vehemence of the Ukrainian resistance. He also doesn't seem to be aware that Russian-speaking or ethnic Russian Ukrainians are very much part of this resistance. More surprisingly, he seems to be ignorant of Ukrainian history, when he says that 'Here Putin returns to the interpretation from the time of the Russian Empire, when Russians, Belarusians, and Ukrainians were seen as three branches of the same people. This concept was suppressed during the Soviet Union, when the official position was that these were three different peoples and languages, even though they were fraternal peoples of common origin.' What was Stalin's genocide in Ukraine other than at attempt to wipe out its separate identity? This brings me to what seems to me Ishchenko's biggest mistake: his failure to acknowledge the counter-revolution by Stalin, and assumption that somehow the revolution went on. This is what we have to combat in every way we can. It is this notion - that somehow Russia under Stalin was a 'socialist' state - that will finish off the left, NOT 'discussing the guilt of Western leftists as Putin’s useful idiots in this moment' which he seems to think 'is very damaging to the Left.' It is not damaging - it is absolutely necessary!

Zelensky has said that any peace deal will have be submitted to a referendum. He's not a dictator.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Free Binayak Sen" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to free-binayaks...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/free-binayaksen/CACEsOZiMGF4GcCSNTYjbmuTpeWNmt6%2BfvCg-Lw-%2B3hcdNPe9_Q%40mail.gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Free Binayak Sen" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to free-binayaks...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/free-binayaksen/777950968.3179184.1648134623893%40mail.yahoo.com.