Man of sorrows

I was not planning or expecting to write this, but I feel I must, whether I prove right or wrong, because we all ought to be aware that the Russo-Ukrainian War is now at a critical point. It is the most deeply dangerous moment for both Ukraine and its president.

As I write, despite all prognostications and the Ukrainians’ lack of some even basic military equipment, the Russians still have not taken Severo-Donetsk. The Ukrainian resistance, fighting block by block, has been incredible. One is tempted to say that it amounts to a victory even if it is only producing attritional stalemate. But the key factor in the eastern region is the Russians’ heavy artillery and missile bombardment. They intend simply to destroy everything in front of them, as in Chechnia and Syria, then move forwards. The Ukrainians are outgunned, they are losing up to 200 soldiers a day, and the Russian force is at least seven times larger.

The US European Command’s ‘International Donation Coordination Centre’ in Stuttgart is efficient and working day and night to supply the Ukrainians with the heavy weapons and medium-range missiles that are vital to stem the Russian advance. But can they, or anyone else, do this fast enough? As the leading military figures in this logistical operation constantly stress, the issue is balanced on a knife edge. Zelensky’s increasingly desperate appeals for western weapons say it all.

But his and his people’s determination to drive the invader out, i.e. to win, is also being threatened from another quarter. The world’s media are beginning to suffer from war-fatigue. A reputable Berlin-based poll of European public opinion shows a clear majority (35% against 23%) in favour of, quote, ‘Europe seeking to end the war as soon as possible, even if it means Ukraine making concessions’, which can only mean recognising Russian illegal seizure of Crimea and Donbas. By ‘Europe’ is meant mainly the EU, which it so happens Ukraine has long wanted to join. Last week the de facto leaders of the EU, Emmanuel Macron, Olaf Scholz and Mario Draghi, were in Kyiv ostensibly supporting Zelensky (although Scholz in particular has delivered very little military aid so far). Shortly afterwards, the EU announced it had given Ukraine its long desired ‘candidate’ status for joining the EU. Like ‘European Public Opinion’, these EU leaders favour an ‘end to the war as soon as possible’. Even the Pope believes the war is partly NATO’s fault. It is only pragmatic to assume, therefore, that Zelensky and his government were under pressure to ‘make peace’ in exchange for EU membership.

This would be a disaster for Zelensky, even if (which seems unlikely) it were approved in the referendum he has always said would have to be held on a deal with the Russians. It is difficult to see how he and his followers could politically survive an EU-sponsored ‘peace’. But if we don’t give the Ukrainians the arms to do what they actually want to do — defeat Russia — what alternative would they have? ‘Europe’ would have coerced them into it and destroyed a political leader head and shoulders above all of them.

What ‘Europe’ does not seem to realise (or does it?) is that such a peace deal could only be an Armistice until Putin was militarily ready to break it. On that occasion he would undoubtedly attempt a successful direct assault on Kyiv, as his avowed object has always been to turn the country into a vassal state like Belorussia. It would in effect be an ‘appeasement deal’. Putin does not do peace any more than Adolf Hitler did. A ‘peace deal’ with Putin would solve absolutely nothing, unless NATO used the breathing space to arm Ukraine so effectively that it could win the war in the second round. But does the West have the will to do that? Many wise, experienced British commentators fear that it doesn’t and that the EU and NATO are going to sell Ukraine out.

You see why I think we are at a terrible moment.

It is quite possible that Putin will propose making ‘peace’ if/when Donbas is taken, and that EU leaders will fall for it, splitting the EU, NATO and the West.

I fear that the only way for Ukraine to win is for the West to play and beat Putin at his own game of ‘special military operations’, i.e. for several sovereign states (the UK, France, Poland, Germany?) to join Ukraine in the field. We would not be ‘at war’ with Russia, you understand; it would just be a ‘special military operation’ to defend another European democracy…

SOME RESPONSES TO GEORGE CALDERON: EDWARDIAN GENIUS

‘This meticulous yet nimble book is bound to remain the definitive account of Calderon’s life’ Charlotte Jones, The Times Literary Supplement

‘The effort of detection, it must be said, was worth it. The biography is a delight to read.’ Emeritus Professor Laurence Brockliss, The London Magazine

‘It is a masterly synthesis of your own approach with scholarship and very judicious discussion of the evidence.’ Emeritus Professor Catherine Andreyev, historian

‘This comprehensive, meticulously researched and highly readable biography, which the author describes as a “story” rather than an academic biography…’ Michael Pursglove, East-West Review

‘A monumental scholarly masterpiece that gives real insight into how the Edwardians viewed the world.’Arch Tait, Translator of Natalya Rzhevskaya’s Memoirs of a Wartime Interpreter

‘The book is written with great assurance and the reader always feels in safe hands. I liked the idea of it being a story and I read it the same way I would read a novel.’ Harvey Pitcher, writer

‘Presents the Edwardian age, and Calderon in particular, as new and forward-looking.’ Emeritus Professor Michael Alexander, in Trinity College, Oxford, Report 2017-18

A review by DAMIAN GRANT appears in the comments to Calderonia’s 7 September post.

A review by JOHN DEWEY appears on Amazon UK.