[Salon] Musical chairs



and defining 'victory' down for Ukraine...
͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­͏     ­
Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more

Musical chairs

and defining 'victory' down for Ukraine...

Sep 22
 
READ IN APP
 

Talleyrand has observed an interesting discussion about Ukraine. The guests were two Ukrainians and two Americans (one of them naturalised, the other a self-exile to Canada). The former two played the part of the cynic; the latter, the part of the realist. (The moderator, the American columnist Thomas Friedman, performed his usual role, the naïf.)

According to both the cynics and the realists, the war in Ukraine is part of a larger struggle.

The main difficulty came from stating what the larger struggle is really about. The realists stated it is about a) the division and the decline of the West; and b) the nature of tyranny and freedom in today’s world. The cynics stated it is about a) the Russian imperial mind and spirit; and b) the nature of nationhood in today’s world.

Talking past one another, the panelists resorted to analogies to make their case. Finnish, South Korean, Scottish, and Israeli models were proposed as positive models for a ‘victorious’ Ukraine; South Vietnam and Ireland, as negative models. (Nobody mentioned Austria, Switzerland, Sweden, Belgium, or Poland as possible models.)

Each time somebody proposed an analogy, it was shot down by the other panelists (or, in the case of the South Korean model, by the same panelist who proposed it).

It is not surprising that a clear and persuasive answer to the question posed to the panel – what might constitute ‘victory’ for Ukraine – was not given but was said to depend upon several ideal conditions, namely:

  • EU membership for Ukraine;

  • a powerful Ukraine able to defend itself in perpetuity;

  • a renewed Western (read: NATO) commitment to Ukrainian defence;

  • the abandonment of Vladimir Putin’s ‘obsession’ with denying Ukrainian nationhood;

  • the defeat and collapse of the Russian state;

  • the burial of the Russian imperial mentality;

  • the reaffirmation of ‘sovereignty’ in Central and Eastern Europe.

‘Fantastical’ may be a better word than ‘ideal’ to describe most of those conditions. Mr Friedman did not press. He opted for personalities (Trump and Putin). He might have asked:

  • What do the EU say about Ukrainian membership? (Russia’s official position has been that it would have no problem with that. NATO is the real problem.)

  • What does a reaffirmation of hard borders in these lands say about the post-Cold War incantation, ‘human rights trump sovereignty’? (Russia’s official position has been that its intervention in Ukraine came in part to protect the rights of minorities against a government which had violated them.)

  • If a victory is defined by its duration, what counts as ‘long’ and ‘short’ in Ukraine?

Finally, one of the cynics on the panel asked what most observers were probably already thinking: how should one define ‘defeat’?

A man sitting in the front row, the television personality Fareed Zakaria, followed with a plea for pragmatism. He asked, shouldn’t Ukrainians set aside some principles and get the best deal it still can? One of the cynics was quick to answer: been there, done that.

This observer was left wondering, who are actually the realists and the real cynics in this war?

Talleyrand is free today. But if you enjoyed this post, you can tell Talleyrand that their writing is valuable by pledging a future subscription. You won't be charged unless they enable payments.

Pledge your support

 
Share
 
 
Like
Comment
Restack
 

© 2025 Talleyrand
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104
Unsubscribe

Get the appStart writing



This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail (Mailman edition) and MHonArc.