[Salon] Concerns about the Ukraine conflict addressed
- To: "[Salon]" <salon@committeefortherepublic.org>
- Subject: [Salon] Concerns about the Ukraine conflict addressed
- From: Chas Freeman <cwfresidence@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 10:00:23 -0400
- Authentication-results: mlm2.listserve.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="CXBuggIJ"
- Authentication-results: semf02.mfg.siteprotect.com; iprev=pass (mail-lj1-f180.google.com) smtp.remote-ip=209.85.208.180; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.a=rsa-sha256; dmarc=pass header.from=gmail.com
- Authentication-results: mfg.siteprotect.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cwfresidence@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=gmail.com
- Dkim-filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mlm2.listserve.net 46C95B07E6
FM: John Whitbeck
Last night, I received the following email
from an old friend:
"John, Do I understand that you think
Putin's invasion of Ukraine was justified by
Russia's security concerns? Similarly that
the takeover of Crimea and sending troops
into Georgia, Moldavia and Eastern Ukraine
was justified because many of the residents
preferred to be independent or part of
Russia? Did the West really provoke all of
this? I am truly puzzled and troubled by
what you are saying. All best, _____."
Since some of my other distinguished
recipients may have similar concerns, I am
transmitting below my response to him.
**************************************************************************************************
Dear _____,
The break-up of the Soviet Union left a
lot of messy loose ends, with millions of
former Soviet citizens suddenly finding
themselves members of minorities in new
countries in which they were unhappy to
find themselves.
I believe that the Russian invasion of
Ukraine has been illegal, unjustified and
tragically unnecessary.
I also believe that it was provoked by the
U.S./NATO, which clearly preferred a
Russian invasion, which has predictably
revitalized NATO, to being perceived to
make any meaningful concessions to
Russia's mutual security
concerns, many of which were reasonable
and could and should have been the subject
of serious win-win negotiations toward an
improved European security structure in
which all countries could feel
reasonably secure.
The reintegration into the Russian
Federation of Crimea, where, by treaty,
more Russian troops than Ukrainian troops
were already stationed in 2014, so that no
"invasion" was necessary, was accomplished
bloodlessly in a careful, five-step
process, involving a popular referendum
and legislative actions in Crimea and
Russia, and, in light of the decision of
the International Court of Justice in the
Kosovo case, did not violate
international law. Crimea's separation
from Ukraine, like Kosovo's separation
from Serbia after 77 days of NATO bombing
of Serbia in flagrant violation of
international law, was clearly in
accordance with the wishes of most of the
people living there. It would not have
happened without the 2014 anti-Russian
coup, which made it inevitable, since
Russia's only warm-water naval base is
located there and could scarcely continue
to exist on the territory of a country
allied with or a member of a military
alliance whose raison d'être is
hostility toward Russia. That should
have been obvious to the U.S. government.
The Russian separatists in the Donbass
were provoked to revolt by the coup and
the immediate suppression of Russian as a
national language by the post-coup regime.
Russia permitted or encouraged Russian
soldiers to take leave, out of uniform, to
support the secessionists but did not
formally send in its armed forces --
perhaps with a view to not violating, at
least in form, international law.
In 2008, Georgia's mentally unbalanced
president Saakashvili (currently
imprisoned) sent his troops into South
Ossetia, which had seceded from Georgia
and been effectively independent since a
Russian-brokered ceasefire in 1992.
Russian troops responded by driving them
out, proceeded briefly into Georgia proper
and then withdrew. Subsequently, Russia
recognized both South Ossetia and Abkhazia
(the other separatist region of Georgia)
as independent states, which it had not
previously done. The situation there has
been basically stable ever since.
Russian troops have been stationed in
Transnistria, the secessionist,
non-Moldovan-speaking eastern strip of
Moldova, since 1992 as peacekeepers
pursuant to the ceasefire agreement
between Moldova and Transnistria. I have
visited both Moldova proper and
Transnistria. The situation appears to be
stable, and no one there seems
particularly bothered by it. Sherif
Tiraspol, perpetual champions of the
Moldovan football league, are the home
team of the Transnistrian capital of
Tiraspol -- and reached the final 32
knock-out round of the Champions League
this year. Russia has not recognized
Transnistria as an independent state.
I believe that Russia acted very
responsibly and constructively in forcing
Azerbaijan to accept a new ceasefire after
its recent attempt to reconquer its
ethnic-Armenian separatist region of
Nagorno-Karabakh, which had seceded from
Azerbaijan and been effectively
independent since a Russian-mediated
ceasefire in 1994 and which I have also
visited, and in basing Russian
peacekeepers there to keep the peace ever
since. Russia has not recognized
Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent state.
You may recall that Russia's primary
demands with respect to Ukraine prior to
its invasion were for Ukraine to accept
the status of neutrality and to implement
its obligations under the Minsk II
Agreement and UN Security Council
Resolution 2202, which called for
negotiating a high degree of autonomy for
the Donbass region under Ukrainian
sovereignty. Whatever terms are
negotiated or new reality is imposed when
this war ends (the sooner the better) will
be substantially less advantageous
territorially to Ukraine. The West has
done the Ukrainian people no favor by
leading them down the primrose path as a
pawn to be sacrificed in furtherance of
the West's own geopolitical rivalry with
Russia.
Personally, I preferred the bipolar world
in which we grew up, in which the Soviet
Union and the United States deterred each
other from doing really stupid things,
like waging major wars of aggression
against other sovereign states.
As I have recently written (https://www.counterpunch.org/2022/02/24/the-territorial-integrity-of-states-vs-the-self-determination-of-peoples/),
there is a perpetual tension between the
inconsistent principles of the territorial
integrity of states and the
self-determination of peoples. Nowhere is
this tension more acute than in the
successor states of the former Soviet
Union. These situations are not black and
white. They are complicated and difficult.
I hope that I have been responsive to your
concerns.
All best wishes to you and ____,
John
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc.