“It is up to Ukraine alone to define the conditions for negotiation with Russia.”
The above is a quote this week from a speech by French President Macron, arguably the least “maximalist” of Western leaders about the war. 1
Every Western politician and just about every pundit repeats the essence of Macron’s line. We are told that NATO cannot and must not impose peace terms that Ukraine will not accept.
Sounds right at face value, because, after all, Ukrainians are suffering all the carnage and destruction. But it’s a demonstrably false thing to say.
Ukraine’s war goals are directly dependent on what assistance is given to it by NATO. Their goals are also dependent on the effect of our sanctions degrading Russian military capability.
If we offer a blank check, Ukraine can go on fighting until either Russian forces are expelled from all of Ukraine or, before that happens, until Russia decides to use nuclear weapons, its one overwhelming military advantage.
I would say we are coming closer and closer to that blank check.
The reverse of a blank check to Ukraine, a cutoff of all military assistance by NATO, is an unimaginable, but valuable thought experiment. Such an action would change the entire dynamic of the war and therefore the peace terms that Ukraine would accept.
Where NATO lands between these two poles of all assistance and no assistance will determine the outcome of the war and therefore what peace terms Ukraine will accept.
So, no, it is not Ukraine alone that will dictate the peace.
And, remember, when we talk about Ukraine in a political sense, we are talking about Zelensky as the leader of Ukraine. So, when we say that it is Ukraine alone that will decide terms for peace, what we are really saying is that it is Zelensky who will decide.
That should lead us to ask what are Zelensky’s motivations and how might they differ from the motivations of the people of Ukraine?
Zelensky is a politician, which I do not mean as an insult. But the priority of a politician is to attain and retain power. A politician may exercise power to do great service to his country or to do great harm.
The track record of politicians who become cult-like leaders and are adored without reservation is bad. And I worry that, similar to Putin in this one respect, there is no one around Zelensky to tell him when he might be wrongheaded or misguided.
Ukraine is rightfully our ally. Zelensky is rightfully admired for his bravery and panache. But, nevertheless, this war has been a disaster for Ukraine in terms of human misery, death, and physical destruction.
If the war does not end well for Ukraine and for Zelensky, history will not look kindly on American and European politicians who repeat the lie of “Don’t blame us; It was always up to Ukraine how far to take the fight.”
In that same speech, admirably, Macron also said “Because in the end, when peace returns to European soil, we will need to build new security balances and we will need, together, to never give in to the temptation of humiliation, nor the spirit of revenge, because these have already in the past wreaked enough havoc on the roads to peace.”
As is commonly said, the first casualty of war is the truth. We have read numerous times that Putin is crazy, Putin is dying, Russia wants to reconstitute their empire, Moldavia is next, Russia was not provoked, NATO is innocent, rape is Russian military policy and has been weaponized, Ukraine is winning, Zelensky is the greatest European leader of our time, etc. Since this has morphed into a proxy war of the USA vs Russia, the decision to end/settle it resides in Washington, not Kiev, to reduce funding and eliminate the sanctions. Biden has voiced a concern for Putin's exit strategy. Since many things in life are subject to an equal and opposite reaction, maybe some thought should be given to our exit strategy as well. This thing feels as if it is spiraling out of control.