Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Are We the Baddies, Part 2: US Meddling in Ukraine and Crimea
I’ve been holding out on you since September when this issue of Hillsdale’s Imprimis came out: Complications of the Ukraine War, by Christopher Caldwell, senior fellow at the Claremont Institute. Now that I have time to clear out my tabs, you get to learn what I did back then.
If you had to give a one-word answer to what this Ukraine War is about, you would probably say Crimea. Crimea is a peninsula jutting out into the middle of the Black Sea. It’s where the great powers of Europe fought the bloodiest war of the century between Napoleon and World War I. It is a defensive superweapon. The country that controls it dominates the Black Sea and can project its military force into Europe, the Middle East, and even the steppes of Eurasia. And since the 1700s, that country has been Russia. Crimea has been the home of Russia’s warm water fleet for 250 years. It is the key to Russia’s southern defenses.
I admit, I’m not following events in Ukraine as closely as many here on Ricochet. But, as I understand it, Ukraine is committed to fighting not just to repel the Russian invasion, but to recover Crimea. This is a solid guarantee for the prolongation of the war indefinitely. Russia simply cannot — will not — let go of the all-important strategic peninsula of Crimea.
Much of the turmoil began under the Bush 43 administration — surprise! — with US election interference, and exacerbated by the Obama administration — surprise, surprise!! — by meddling in the trade deal negotiated between Ukraine and the EU, and vehemently opposed by Russia.
The previous year (2013), Ukrainian diplomats had negotiated a free trade deal with the European Union that would have cut out Russia. Russia then outbid the EU with its own deal—which included $15 billion in incentives for Ukraine and continued naval basing rights for Russia—and Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich signed it. U.S.-backed protests broke out in Kiev’s main square, the Maidan, and in cities across the country. According to a speech made at the time by a State Department official, the U.S. had by that time spent $5 billion to influence Ukraine’s politics. And, considering that Ukraine then had a lower per capita income than Cuba, Jamaica, or Namibia, $5 billion could buy a lot of influence. An armory was raided, shootings near the Maidan left dozens of protesters dead, Yanukovich fled the country, and the U.S. played the central role in setting up a successor government.
The other tidbit that stands out in this piece is this:
In a referendum in January 1991, 93 percent of the citizens of Crimea voted for autonomy from Ukraine. In 1994, 83 percent voted for the establishment of a dual Crimean/Russian citizenship. We’ll leave aside the referendum held after the Russians arrived in 2014, which resulted in a similar percentage but remains controversial.
As long as Ukraine insists on controlling Crimea and even the Russophilic eastern Ukraine, I don’t see a possible resolution to the conflict. I oppose another (Bush) forever war and believe if the US meddles further, it should be to force Ukraine to the negotiating table. For its own sake, as well as ours.
Published in General
I have to agree, Manny. In today’s world, with today’s weaponry, what difference does it make if Russia borders Poland, or it borders Ukraine? Is it about 10 seconds of rocket flight? Also, if Russia takes over all of Ukraine then it would be Russia herself (actually Putin) that put Russia right next to NATO. I am very ambivalent about our involvement in this conflict. I do not trust Ukraine as being anything but a corrupt nation, possibly providing millions of dollars worth of kickbacks to some of our corrupt politicians. But Russia, especially under Putin, is no Shangri-la either. Everyone is bad in this conflict, including the USA with the Biden gang in charge.
I have no idea what “high dudgeon” even means. “American meddling” has long been used as liberal slang for supposed American intervention abroad. You used the words. If you didn’t understand their connotation, then retract them. You are mouthing the words of decades long lefty anti Americanism.
Right. It sure looks like McCain and Graham were talking about war starting in 2017 long before Russia invaded Ukraine. I can’t get over people whose default excuse for sending a hundred billion dollars to be lost in Ukraine, without allowing for negotiated compromises for peaceful solutions, is their black-and-white insistence that Russia attacked Ukraine’s territorial integrity without provocation.
The US planned and was pep-rallying this war at least a early as 2016.
Harsh…very, very harsh!
That’s right. “Enough of Russian aggression.” Russia had been an aggressor against Ukraine since 2014 where by some estimates 10,000 Ukrainians had been killed. Imagine if 10,000 Americans had been killed by Mexico what people would be saying. And maybe we had espionage of Russia’s intentions? In fact it didn’t take a heck of a lot of espionage to know that Putin had intentions of taking Ukraine. He pretty much had said in open forums. From what I recall, Russia paused its aggression when Trump took office. It was only after Russia had a flat out invasion of Ukraine last year that this came to a head.
Actually Putin was concerned before the war about US nuclear cruise missiles being developed with (I’m pretty sure) a 500 mile range and being installed in existing launchers on Ukraine’s border with Russia. So proximity is an issue. And Ukraine would have done well to remain a buffer state.
Insulting. I am an American patriot. Especially a lover of the American founding (which, btw, the founders weren’t all that favorable toward foreign entanglements), and from which we have strayed very, very far. However, I will not declare that America is faultless and that it doesn’t meddle in affairs that are none of its business or in the interests of its people. There have been a number of color revolutions that were encouraged by the US and which turned out badly for the revolutionaries.
Is there any federal government run by either party that you will concede has caused more harm than good in its foreign policy decisions? Even through weakness? Even the Biden (mal)administration?
High dudgeon means you’re full of self-righteousness. I think that’s fairly plainly evident. You believe vehemently that you hold the moral high ground. I demur.
This is linguistically unsound (meddling does not mean colonialism) and is even poorer mind-reading.
And Ukraine wasn’t rocketing the Donbas, either. There’s more to this than you are considering.
I will refer to my comment #50, which I will copy over which you so casually ignore:
That probably doesn’t even come close to all we did for Russia after the Cold War. The United States tried to bring Russia into the ring of decent nations. To say we “meddled” is anti American jargon. We did no such thing. You want to hold to it, that’s on you.
In 2014? Ukraine was rocketing who? After or before Russian aggression?
I am no weapons guy. It just doesn’t seem very far from Poland through Ukraine to Russia.
Exactly right, @manny. One needn’t look any further than to who is the aggressor. Ukraine may have a corrupt regime, but Russia didn’t invade to correct that.
Yep, Ukraine provoked Russia by being there.
’cause military buildups never provoked anyone. . .
You know what else has been going on in Ukraine for over a decade?
Thank you, and supporters of Putin seem to be forgetting the laughable justification Putin gave of “deNazifying” Ukraine.
And from what I remember, the United States capitulated to Putin and did not put mid range rockets in Europe. I believe that was under Obama.
Whatever Ukraine did in 2014 in Dobas, it was in counter offensive:
They need a lot less gas if they only use it as a manufacturing chemical, and produce their electricity with nuclear, which they were doing more of in the past. Shutting down nuclear and becoming more dependent on natural gas for power – and heat – was another foolish choice.
They should restart their nuclear plants and build more.
Would the Church also tell me that I’m only morally allowed to resist an individual attacker if “there’s a reasonable chance of success?” Then feh on the Church.
And the “feh” from women should be much louder than mine.
How is NATO an aggressor as long as they stay within their borders, which is the main thing Russia has refused to do over time?
Batting 1,000 with the insults, Manny. Am I a “supporter of Putin?” Did I (or Caldwell, for that matter) say anything about denazification or in defense of Putin’s motives (other than stating the possibility that he felt provoked, whether or not we westerners believe he should have responded in the way he did)? Did anyone else do so here? I don’t think so.
Do you have any evidence that Russia/Putin would have allowed them to remain just a buffer state? Especially considering what had already been happening even before last Feb.
I’m not sure what’s considered a reasonable chance of success, but Ukraine is certainly proving they have a reasonable chance of success. My bet is they win. I’d have to look up the language on a just war. That language of reasonable chance of success surprises me.
You’re the one that said “we meddled.” So obviously you side with Putin. You’re the one that said “it was complicated.” Therefore Putin has some moral standing in your eyes. If you are saying that Putin felt provoked, as you are clearly saying in this very paragraph, then you are siding with Putin. If you don’t realize the implication of your words, then apologize. But I don’t see how anyone reading what you have written can think otherwise.
The question before us is whether we will support Ukraine’s just war of self-defense or an unjust Putin conquest.
Heh.
Even the whole “it’s only 5.6% of the defense budget” is insulting and obscene.
That money could prevent the invasion of the United States. But nope — the invasion here continues.