Russia invading Ukraine was clearly wrong.
What I am unsure about is Russia's intentions afterwards. In the end I suspect some of Ukraine will, in effect, be ceded to Russia or become "independent".
Several questions are begged:
- Why did the West do very little when Russia annexed Crimea about 10 years ago?
- Why did the West not intervene when Ukraine territories in the East were being fought over years ago?
- Crimea and disputed Ukraine eastern territories are made neutral states with UN protection.
- The people of eastern Ukraine territories and Crimea are offered free elections under the control of a neutral country or the UN acceptable to Russia and Ukraine.
- Russia is told in no uncertain terms that any attack on any NATO country would be dealt with by a massive response by all NATO states.
- Ukraine becomes a neutral country and vows never to join NATO.
- NATO declares never to attack or invade Russia.
Invading a neighbour can never be right though.
2 comments:
We should refrain from suggesting solutions to the invasion which favour Russia. Ukraine has earned the right to determine it's own future.
After all imagine if someone in Ukraine suggested that the UK cede Norfolk and the area around Cambridge to Russia in exchange for peace, (you know that might even work),
When the USSR broke up Ukraine ended up with a portion of the Soviet nuclear stockpile on it's territory. This worried the west who tried to persuade the Ukrainians to give them up. Ukraine was not keen to do so having had experience with its large neighbour on many occasions. The west succeeded in getting them to do it by guaranteeing Ukraine's future security. A deal behind the support they are providing now and a deal many in Ukraine bitterly regret making.
There is nothing worse than imposing a settlement on Ukraine. This is their decision to make. I am just wondering how it is going to end.
Post a Comment