Top Seven Things People Get Wrong About the Ukraine-Russia War

As the Russo-Ukraine war drags into its third year, peace talks are finally underway in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. All parties to the conflict are busy trying to control the narrative. While we do not exonerate Russia from its very bad behavior, others have behaved badly as well. Let us briefly describe some of the major claims being made in the West, why they are wrong, and assist you in creating your own narrative.

First Error: Prior to Trump, the United States was committed to helping Ukraine defeat Russia. This is not correct. For the past three years the US limited the arms sent to Ukraine, in both quantity and type, as well as how they could be used. And the US tried to ensure that NATO did the same thing. Perhaps fearing a wider war that could involve nuclear weapons, the US never provided the arms to make a Ukrainian victory possible. In fact, the US never pledged to help restore Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders. If victory was not in the cards, then what was the goal of US support for Ukraine? As former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin remarked in an unguarded moment, the goal was to weaken Russia. Ukraine became a convenient proxy to achieve that end. Sorry about all that blood.

Second Error: The Russian Invasion was unprovoked. We hear this continuously from the media and US officials, especially the former Biden administration. But in fact, many analysts and US government officials warned decades ago that NATO expansion into Eastern Europe would be a provocation. In addition, US involvement in the Ukraine coup of 2014, the failure to support the Minsk peace process, as well as its refusal to negotiate or even talk with Russia prior to the invasion were provocative. This is not to excuse the Russian invasion, but these are facts.

Third Error: Many people also mistakenly believe that the Russian government’s goal is to take over and occupy all of Ukraine. That is extremely unlikely given that Russia only committed 190,000 troops to the invasion, far fewer than would be needed to control a country of Ukraine’s size. In contrast, the US at the height of the occupation deployed less than 200,000 troops to Iraq a far smaller country, and still could not control it. However, the numbers of Russian troops engaged in the fighting have increased, now totalling about 580,000 in the Kursk region and in Eastern Ukraine, according to the Kiev Independent. In 1969 the US had 540,000 troops in Vietnam and could not come close to controlling it. Russia does not have the capacity to either attack or control the rest of Europe, even if they were to fully mobilize.

Fourth Error: Vladimir Putin is the only problem, and peace will come if he is removed. This one is easy to disprove. It is a version of the Great Man theory of history which focuses on the actions of leaders to the exclusion of almost anything else in explaining nations’ behaviors. But former CIA Director William Burns, the US ambassador to Russia in 2008, warned in a secret memo that the entire Russian political class was united in its opposition to NATO expansion. (Mr. Burns never intended that the memo would see the light of day. We would not know about it except for a Julian Assange leak.) If Mr. Putin were to exit the scene, he would in all likelihood be replaced by someone as bad or worse.

File. Photo by Max Kukurudziak on Unsplash

Fifth Error: Negotiations with Russia are to be avoided because they cannot be trusted to honor agreements. But the reality is that the United States has recently abandoned a number of treaties and agreements including the INF Treaty that kept intermediate range nuclear missiles out of Europe. It was of particular importance to Russia. In addition, the US has also torn up the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Open Skies Treaty, and the Iran nuclear deal, not to mention trade agreements made with Canada and Mexico. The Russians are tough and skilled negotiators, but it is hard to argue that their record on honoring agreements is worse than that of the US.

Sixth Error: Ukraine is a democracy. Again this is not correct, although strides were being made before the Russian invasion. At this time Ukraine has slid backwards to the point that civil liberties are quite limited, unions are outlawed, the media is controlled, and elections have been postponed indefinitely. Corruption remains a significant problem. Most concerning of all, the Ukraine government is being significantly influenced by extreme ethnic nationalists.

Seventh Error: There is no risk of a wider nuclear war. In fact, there is such a risk, especially since last November when Ukraine fired US missiles into Russian lands. The Russian government then declared that they could respond with nuclear weapons if an adversary used weapons against Russia supplied by a nuclear state. What would the US government do if Russia supplied missiles to Cuba which then fired them at the US? The idea that American policy makers can tip-toe along the line of nuclear war without much risk is both ludicrous and terrifying.

All of the correctives offered above are supported by solid evidence. They should be part of a debate on the Ukraine-Russia conflict

If we are to help Ukraine retain its independence and sovereignty, we will need a clear-eyed analysis of the situation. Right now, we do not have that.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Informed Comment.

About the Author