By Patrick J. Buchanan
"Now that the
Soviet Empire is dead, the Soviet Union is dead. Communism is dormant,
and the USSR has devolved into 15 nations; why did we move our Cold War
alliance onto Moscow's front porch? Would we tolerate this?"
When NBC's Lester Holt asked President Joe Biden what might prompt him
to send U.S. troops to rescue Americans fleeing Ukraine, Biden replied:
"There's not. That's a world war when Americans and Russia start
shooting at one another."
"It's not like we're dealing with a terrorist organization. We're
dealing with one of the largest armies in the world. ... Things could go
crazy quickly."
Biden was saying Americans are not going to fight Russians in Ukraine,
even to protect or extract imperiled U.S. troops, diplomats or citizens.
Speaking last week on the Senate floor, Sen. Ted Cruz echoed Biden: "I
want to be clear and unequivocal. ... Under no circumstances should we
send our sons and daughters to die to defend Ukraine from Russia."
The question the Biden and Cruz comments immediately raise?
Has not Russian President Vladimir Putin pretty much already realized
his principal goal in this crisis — that Ukraine never become a member
of NATO?
For if Biden and Cruz are unwilling to send U.S. troops to Ukraine to
repel Russian invaders, how could the U.S. bring Ukraine into NATO,
where, under Article 5, it would be both our moral and legal obligation
to do so?
After meeting with Putin, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said of
Ukraine's admission to NATO: "Everyone must step back a bit here and
make it clear to themselves that we just can't have a possible military
conflict over a question that is not on the agenda."
The Germans seem to be saying Ukraine's membership in NATO is not even
on the table for discussion and decision. It is a nonissue.
Again, if Putin has been given private assurances that Ukraine will
never be a member of NATO, he would appear to have gotten his
nonnegotiable demand, as long as he does not crow about his victory.
And if Ukraine is not going to be a member of NATO, Georgia, a far
smaller and far less populous nation, even farther east than Ukraine, is
not going to become a NATO member either.
Who in the West, outside of Kyiv, is now demanding it?
The next items on Putin's menu appear to be the rebellious provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk in eastern Ukraine.
Tuesday, the Duma, the Russian parliament, voted to ask Putin to
recognize the breakaway regions as "sovereign and independent states."
Thursday, artillery fire was reported from the pro-Russian rebel side.
Recognition of Luhansk and Donetsk as independent republics would end
the Minsk peace process that foresees their reunification with Ukraine,
but with Kyiv granting the two regions greater autonomy.
But if Putin has gotten assurances Ukraine will not be a member of NATO,
and if he is about to make his next move, with 160,000 Russian troops
still on the borders of Ukraine, it seems premature to declare Biden the
victor in the crisis.
For who is demanding that Ukraine be brought into NATO now?
Who is calling for military action to keep Ukraine a de facto ally?
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has challenged Russia's
announcement that it was returning some troops to their bases, saying
satellite imagery suggested the opposite was happening.
"They have increased the number of troops and more troops are on their way. So, so far, no de-escalation," Stoltenberg said.
"The new normal is that Russia has demonstrated that it ... is willing
to contest some of the fundamental principles for our security, the
right for every nation to choose its own path."
Putin does not threaten any vital interest of the United States and does
not want war with the United States. But, as a great power, Russia
claims a right to secure, peaceful and friendly borders, free of
military alliances designed to circumscribe, contain and control it.
And the protests Moscow is making are not without validity?
Now that the Soviet Empire is dead, the Soviet Union is dead. Communism
is dormant, and the USSR has devolved into 15 nations; why did we move
our Cold War alliance onto Moscow's front porch?
Would we tolerate this?
For what is "NATO enlargement," other than a lengthening series of U.S.
war guarantees to fight Russia on behalf of nations farther and farther
away from us, and of ever-diminishing importance to the United States?
On March 1, 1917, the story broke of a secret cable from German Foreign
Minister Arthur Zimmermann to his minister in Mexico City, to make an
offer to the government.
If war erupted between Germany and the U.S., the Zimmermann Telegram
read, and Mexico sided with Germany, a victorious Second Reich would
support the return of "the lost territory in Texas, New Mexico and
Arizona."
Enraged at Germany's offer to make Mexico its ally and to support the
breakup of our country, the U.S., five weeks later, declared war on
Germany.
Can we not understand the rising rage in Moscow as we convert all its
former Warsaw Pact allies and ex-republics of the USSR into member
states of a military alliance established to contain and control Russia?