Posts
I support Ukraine entirely in her struggle but I hope (but do not expect) that peace is made as quickly as possible, before Ukraine is destroyed. Ukraine will benefit from peace much more than from retaking Kherson. It's true that Russia will use a peace to rearm and refresh its troops, but so will Ukraine and to a much greater extent as the Americans and British are supplying them with arms. Sanctions are proving horribly damaging to Europe (not so much so to Russia, really) and economic catastrophe will have unforeseeable consequences.
Why is no-one marching for peace in Romania or England or America or in any other countries, like they did at the time of the invasion of Iraq or countless other times?
Cozmin Gusa said this morning talking to Adriana Bahmuteanu that a quick peace was essential. Are other Romanian politicians saying this?
Peter Hitchens agrees with me in his article today in The Mail on Sunday.
Why is no one marching? Well, in the case of Iraq, the decision for war or peace was up to the United States government. It was entirely reasonable, if ineffective, for American citizens to petition for the redress of a grievance. In the Ukraine, the decision for war and peace is only indirectly in the hands of the US government. It could bring an end to the conflict in a few months by stopping the supply of arms and pressing the rest of NATO to do the same. But I don't think there is much support for that here. A very few old leftists have a lingering weakness for Mother Russia, and they're about it on the immediate peace side.
ReplyDeleteOf course, they can have peace any time they want, by surrendering. We could have had peace with Hitler in 1940 it we'd surrendered. But I'm glad we didn't. And it you live in Moldova, or Estonia, or Finland, or even Poland, you're probably hoping that Ukraine doesn't surrender either.
ReplyDelete