OPINION: We, the People, and the Gods That Failed Us

I recently returned from several weeks in Ukraine with a remarkable group of volunteers distributing hot pizzaand sweets to orphans, hospitals, schools, refugees, and other communities struggling to survive in a nation at war and a devastated economy and infrastructure.

Only two of us were of Ukrainian heritage, while 10others were Swiss, French, Scottish, British, Welsh, American, German, Canadian, and, at various other times, a dozen different nationalities. All paid their own way to get to Ukraine. Except for (very basic) lodging, occasional group meals, and a slice of pizza –no compensation was provided or expected. In exchange, they earned the right to be awakened by air-raid sirens, sit hours in unheated dank basements, stand in the cold until the freshly baked food was gone, and count the minutes till scheduled brown-outs.

Who were these brave, indomitable souls who risked their lives, comfort, and costs to help Ukrainians in a righteous cause?  

And what was the attitude of those Ukrainians we met who continue to suffer through the hardships of this war? They are determined to continue the fight and prevail, but their trust in the commitment of American and European leaders is fading. All are ordinary “people” showing support for Ukraine in a war of pure evil versus good – Europe’s poorest country withstanding three years of butchery from a slithering creature of the black muscovite lagoon. It is not the “people” but the “gods” who have failed us.  

Other Topics of Interest

Australian Foreign Minister Visits Kyiv, Confirms Reopening of Embassy

The announcement comes with the promise of further support and follows criticism within Australia of the government’s slowness to act.

Here is only a partial list of those “gods” who dishonored themselves and their countries.

Bill Clinton (though now relenting) colluded with Russia and the UK in disarming Ukraine of its nuclear weapons in exchange for written “assurances” and “guarantees” of its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Barack Obama completed disarming Ukraine and then urged it to stand down in the face of Putin’s takeover of Crimea and Donbas while dismissing prior US assurances and refusing lethal arms for Ukraine’s defense.

Donald Trump, who served his first term during four years of Russia’s continuing war leading up to the 2022 invasion, and who is to be credited for approving the sale of lethal weapons but did little else to strengthen Ukraine or impede Putin’s construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. Despite Ukraine’s long-standing charter of “strategic partnership” with the US and written US assurances of support, he contributed significantly to his party’s self-defeating isolationism.

President Joe Biden had the right instincts regarding policy but was wrong about execution. Unlike his predecessors, Biden understood the stakes and succeeded in creating a coalition of 50 pro-democratic states in support of Ukraine. He promised “whatever it takes” and is credited with saving Ukraine during the first few months of the invasion by providing the weapons Ukrainians desperately needed to repel the invaders.  

However, delays, timidity, and hesitation in the type and quantities of weapons approved and provided and excessive restrictions on their use resulted in unnecessary civilian and military casualties and destruction. Despite his good intentions, Biden disregarded Gen. Colin Powell’s warning that “every resource and tool should be used in war to achieve decisive force against the enemy, minimizing casualties and ending the conflict quickly.”

The Pope persisted in promoting a false moral equivalence by failing to hold responsible only one party (Russia) for the ensuing evil.

The various Ukrainian presidents, oligarchs, and senior officials enriched themselves at the expense of their nation and frittered away most of its military capability and assets.

Although the list above identifies only those US presidents who have knowingly or by omission or excessive timidity failed Ukraine and its global supporters, certain European and NATO leaders share much of the blame. After all, but for Ukraine’s interposition, Europe would have been directly and immediately at risk and unprepared if Russia had chosen to attack it.

They were (and some still are) content to hide behind America’s big skirt and look to Ukraine as a buffer. Now that America and Europe’s “existential threat” has been whittled down to size by Ukraine, the incoming US administration is considering rewarding Putin with territory that is not America’s to give and a fanciful “demilitarized zone” 12 times the length of Korea’s. Would Europe go to war if Russia should decide to cross it?

No amount of lipstick on the pig will change the fact that any concession to Putin remains a pig. The world will see it as a victory for Russia and a defeat for the US and NATO. There is no “gray” area in this war. There is no room for “compromise.”  

Russia has often stated its intent to wage a genocidal war by eliminating Ukrainian statehood and a distinct nation. Furthermore, it intends to reintegrate some NATO states into its empire and upend nearly a century of carefully crafted international rule of law.

Ukraine is only the beginning. But with the right kind of US and global support, Ukraine is ready to slay the dragon and end it now. Feeding it bits and pieces of Ukrainian territory will encourage and empower the dragon.

Ukraine’s president had requested and was promised that NATO train and equip ten Ukrainian brigades but was provided enough for only two and a half. Alternatively, in exchange for territory, he requested that NATO accept as a member that part of Ukraine not occupied by Russia, but even tiny Luxemburg(dependent on Switzerland for its defense) rejected such an offer as too risky for its comfort and security.

And, again, he requested simply adequate air cover from neighboring NATO countries to protect Ukraine’s civilian population from nearby incoming drones and missiles, but that, too, was refused. It should be pretty evident that – despite all the supportive language by NATO officials – they wish Ukraine to remain simply a buffer zone against the barbarians.

If Russia should succeed in weaponizing Ukrainian assets and personnel in its occupied territories against NATO countries, will these officials acknowledge their cold-hearted timidity and thoughtless irresponsibility?

If the collective economic superpower of Europe and the US (25 times that of Russia) and the collective conventional military superpower of NATO and the US (3 times that of Russia) cannot be trusted to keep an international pariah and accused war criminal in check, then how long will it be before that deceitful thug, having been encouraged and empowered with his victory, will return for more?

The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.