The Hill: Sadly, Trump is right on Ukraine

[Lava-Man]

by Alan J. Kuperman

[Alan J. Kuperman is an Associate Professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin and has held positions such as a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the U.S. Institute of Peace. Before academia, he worked in policy roles in Washington, D.C., including for Congress. He holds degrees from Harvard, Johns Hopkins SAIS, and MIT.]

Full article below (note there are links imbedded to source some of his assertions). Recommend reading it. Kuperman has a heck of a resume and is definitely not a Trump fan boy.

I rarely agree with President Trump, but his latest controversial statements about Ukraine are mostly true. They only seem preposterous because western audiences have been fed a steady diet of disinformation about Ukraine for more than a decade. It is time to set the record straight on three key points that illuminate why Ukrainians and former President Joe Biden — not merely Russian President Vladimir Putin — bear significant responsibility for the outbreak and perpetuation of war in Ukraine.

First, as recently documented by overwhelming forensic evidence, and affirmed even by a Kyiv court, it was Ukrainian right-wing militants who started the violence in 2014 that provoked Russia’s initial invasion of the country’s southeast including Crimea. Back then, Ukraine had a pro-Russia president, Viktor Yanukovych, who had won free and fair elections in 2010 with strong support from ethnic Russians in the country’s southeast.

In 2013, he decided to pursue economic cooperation with Russia rather than Europe as previously planned. Pro-western activists responded with mainly peaceful occupation of the capital’s Maidan square and government offices, until the president eventually offered substantial concessions in mid-February 2014, after which they mainly withdrew.

Just then, however, right-wing militants overlooking the square started shooting Ukrainian police and remaining protesters. Police returned fire at the militants, who then claimed bogusly that the police had killed the unarmed protesters. Outraged by this ostensible government massacre, Ukrainians descended on the capital and ousted the president, who fled to Russia for protection.

Putin responded by deploying troops to Crimea and weapons to the southeast Donbas region on behalf of ethnic Russians who felt their president had been undemocratically overthrown. While this backstory does not justify Russia’s invasion, it explains that it was hardly “unprovoked.”

Second, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky contributed to a wider war by violating peace deals with Russia and seeking NATO military aid and membership. The deals, known as Minsk 1 and 2, had been negotiated under his predecessor President Petro Poroshenko in 2014 and 2015 to end fighting in the southeast and protect endangered troops.

Ukraine was to guarantee Donbas limited political autonomy by the end of 2015, which Putin believed would be sufficient to prevent Ukraine from joining — or serving as a military base for — NATO. Regrettably, Ukraine refused for seven years to fulfill that commitment.

Zelensky even campaigned in 2019 on a promise to finally implement the accords to prevent further war. But after winning election, he reneged, apparently less concerned about risking war than looking weak on Russia.

Zelensky instead increased weapons imports from NATO countries, which was the last straw for Putin. So, on Feb. 21, 2022, Russia recognized the independence of Donbas, deployed troops there for “peacekeeping,” and demanded Zelensky renounce his quest for NATO military assistance and membership.

When Zelensky again refused, Putin massively expanded his military offensive on Feb. 24. Intentionally or not, Zelensky had provoked Russian aggression, although that obviously does not excuse Moscow’s subsequent war crimes.

Third, Joe Biden too contributed crucially to the escalation and perpetuation of fighting. In late 2021, when Putin mobilized forces on Ukraine’s border and demanded implementation of the Minsk deals, it seemed obvious that unless Zelensky relented, Russia would invade to at least form a land bridge between Donbas and Crimea.

Considering that Ukraine already was existentially dependent on U.S. military assistance, if President Biden had insisted that Zelensky comply with Putin’s request, it would have happened. Instead, Biden lamentably left the decision to Zelensky and pledged that if Russia invaded, the U.S. would respond “swiftly and decisively,” which Zelensky read as a green light to defy Putin.

Had Trump been president, he would not have provided such a blank check, so Zelensky would have had little choice but to implement the Minsk deals to avert war. Even if Zelensky had still refused and provoked Russia to invade, Trump would have denied him a veto over peace negotiations, which Biden recklessly gave by declaring, “There’s nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.”

That pledge tragically emboldened Ukraine to prolong the war in expectation of eventually decisive U.S. military aid, which Biden then refused to supply due to fear of nuclear escalation. In that way, Biden raised false hopes in Ukraine, needlessly perpetuating a war that has killed or wounded hundreds of thousands in the last two years alone during which the frontlines have shifted by less than 1 percent of Ukraine’s territory.

The basic outlines of a deal to end the fighting are obvious even if details remain to be negotiated, as Trump and Putin started doing today in a phone call. Russia will continue to occupy Crimea and other portions of the southeast, while the rest of Ukraine will not join NATO but will get security guarantees from some western countries. The sad thing is that such a plan could have been achieved at least two years ago if only President Biden had made military aid conditional on Zelensky negotiating a ceasefire.

Even more tragic, whatever peace deal emerges after the war will be worse for Ukraine than the Minsk accords that Zelensky foolishly abandoned due to his political ambitions and naïve expectation of bottomless U.S. support.

 

[Eastmandawg]

by Alan J. Kuperman

[Alan J. Kuperman is an Associate Professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin and has held positions such as a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the U.S. Institute of Peace. Before academia, he worked in policy roles in Washington, D.C., including for Congress. He holds degrees from Harvard, Johns Hopkins SAIS, and MIT.]

Full article below (note there are links imbedded to source some of his assertions). Recommend reading it. Kuperman has a heck of a resume and is definitely not a Trump fan boy.

Germans…

 

[Lava-Man]

Sorry, forgot to link the article above. It's here ---> link

 

[TivoliDawg]

by Alan J. Kuperman

[Alan J. Kuperman is an Associate Professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin and has held positions such as a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the U.S. Institute of Peace. Before academia, he worked in policy roles in Washington, D.C., including for Congress. He holds degrees from Harvard, Johns Hopkins SAIS, and MIT.]

Full article below (note there are links imbedded to source some of his assertions). Recommend reading it. Kuperman has a heck of a resume and is definitely not a Trump fan boy.

Oh brother. More nonsense about how Ukraine caused their own invasion. Lol

 

[WyoDawg307]

by Alan J. Kuperman

[Alan J. Kuperman is an Associate Professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin and has held positions such as a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the U.S. Institute of Peace. Before academia, he worked in policy roles in Washington, D.C., including for Congress. He holds degrees from Harvard, Johns Hopkins SAIS, and MIT.]

Full article below (note there are links imbedded to source some of his assertions). Recommend reading it. Kuperman has a heck of a resume and is definitely not a Trump fan boy.

So, he has summarized what many have been saying for years. I would respect him a lot more if he would have added more color on the "right wing militants" in Ukraine in 2014 if he had called them CIA recruited and paid for stooges, to effect the color revolution that the EU/US wanted.
I suspect he doesn't want to lose those government grants paying for his research, so he cannot admit that.

 

[Lava-Man]

Oh brother. More nonsense about how Ukraine caused their own invasion. Lol

Did you even read the article?

 

[Eastmandawg]

Oh brother. More nonsense about how Ukraine caused their own invasion. Lol

“While this backstory does not justify Russia’s invasion, it explains that it was hardly “unprovoked.”

 

[Dirty Hairy Dawg]

So things aren't as simple as they seem and our media doesn't always provide us with the complete truth? Whodathunkit.

 

[Eastmandawg]

So things aren't as simple as they seem and our media doesn't always provide us with the complete truth? Whodathunkit.

Mesopotamians!

 

[The Original SLC Dawg]

Did you even read the article?

No, he didn’t. He just reposts ChatGPT stuff.

 

[litedawg1968]

Oh brother. More nonsense about how Ukraine caused their own invasion. Lol

So thats gonna be a No on the reading it part?

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

Did you even read the article?

I think it makes the point that War was avoidable. If you accept the reality of who Putin is.....you don't do what Biden did. And you can make the argument that what Biden did hurt the Ukranians more than anyone else - giving them a false sense of security to thumb their noses at Putin.

 

[TivoliDawg]

Did you even read the article?

I got through the first few lies and decided that this was very similar to all the other identical posts over the last six months.

Filled with half truths, just enough random facts to sound real, and the rest made up.

It’s not so much that people here post Russian propaganda, it’s that you (apparently) believe it.

I love all the “new facts” we have learned about Ukraine in the last eight months. Eyeroll.

 

[Lava-Man]

I got through the first few lies and decided that this was very similar to all the other identical posts over the last six months.

Filled with half truths, just enough random facts to sound real, and the rest made up.

It’s not so much that people here post Russian propaganda, it’s that you (apparently) believe it.

I love all the “new facts” we have learned about Ukraine in the last eight months. Eyeroll.

You claim the author is a Russian propagandist with zero evidence while ignoring the actual tone of what he wrote....and people have been saying all these things for months. You simply didn't listen.

 

[WyoDawg307]

I got through the first few lies and decided that this was very similar to all the other identical posts over the last six months.

Filled with half truths, just enough random facts to sound real, and the rest made up.

It’s not so much that people here post Russian propaganda, it’s that you (apparently) believe it.

I love all the “new facts” we have learned about Ukraine in the last eight months. Eyeroll.

You know some of us chatters knew these facts in 2022 and even some of us were aware shortly after the coup happened in 2014.
Learned experience is an amazing gift.

 

[Lava-Man]

Zelensky does not want to end the war. This "redline" is never going to happen. No sane person would argue otherwise. Russia has nuclear weapons. Outside of WWII, nobody can force Russia to do anything. Economic sanctions? Sure. Russia will nuke everybody before that forces them to do anything.

Absolute Stupidity.

 

[Two if by Sea]

Did you even read the article?

No. He just lives on the Cold War era still

 

[willdup]

So, he has summarized what many have been saying for years. I would respect him a lot more if he would have added more color on the "right wing militants" in Ukraine in 2014 if he had called them CIA recruited and paid for stooges, to effect the color revolution that the EU/US wanted.
I suspect he doesn't want to lose those government grants paying for his research, so he cannot admit that.

If you want to chronicle foreign interference in Ukrainian politics, you might want to start with Russia poisoning Victor Yanukovych with dioxin in 2004 after it became clear he was going to win over the stooge candidate for president backed by Putin.

But that wouldn’t fit your “The US and Ukraine are entirely responsible for the invasion” narrative.

 

[Lava-Man]

But that wouldn’t fit your “The US and Ukraine are entirely responsible for the invasion” narrative.

That's not at all what the article says, fwiw (if that is included in what you're implying here)

 

[willdup]

That's not at all what the article says, fwiw (if that is included in what you're implying here)

No, I was speaking directly to the poster I was replying to, who has been very consistent on this topic.

 

[atlanta cock#]

If you want to chronicle foreign interference in Ukrainian politics, you might want to start with Russia poisoning Victor Yanukovych with dioxin in 2004 after it became clear he was going to win over the stooge candidate for president backed by Putin.

But that wouldn’t fit your “The US and Ukraine are entirely responsible for the invasion” narrative.

Where does Obama, Hillary, Schiff and Steele sit in your wonderland?

 

[willdup]

Where does Obama, Hillary, Schiff and Steele sit in your wonderland?

Huh? I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

 

[atlanta cock#]

Huh? I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

Your #18 addressing narratives.

 

[willdup]

Your #18 addressing narratives.

Somehow, I now know even less about the point you are trying to make than I did before your clarifying post.

 

[dawgfood0612]

Damn, do the Trumpers on here love them some Ruskies or what?

Constantly repeating Russia talking points, it is really sad.

What has happened to the party of Reagan who stood up to Russia and helped end the Soviet Empire?

Now the Trumpers want to help Putin bring the Empire back.

 

[Lava-Man]

Damn, do the Trumpers on here love them some Ruskies or what?

Constantly repeating Russia talking points, it is really sad.

What has happened to the party of Reagan who stood up to Russia and helped end the Soviet Empire?

Now the Trumpers want to help Putin bring the Empire back.

Did you actually read the freaking article? Clearly not.

If you did and still stand by your response...holy crap.