The use of the word “us” publicly identifies the interests of Britain with the interests of Kiev. Trash is calling for more and more financial and military aid to be sent to Ukraine, and that aid is now on the brink of overt engagement with Russia. Russia’s other adversarial neighbors, Moldova and Georgia, appear to want to join the alliance. Although Putin is irrational and unreliable, Tras argues that he is prone to deterrence and will not react recklessly to its escalating war. It does not mention anywhere the danger of its desired escalation, let alone the possible compromises of peace. Hers is tabloid diplomacy. Ahead of his visit to Kyiv this month, Boris Johnson also instructed Volodymyr Zelensky not to make any concessions to Putin, a line that Trash clearly seeks to compete with. It is not uncommon for democratic leaders to play war games to excite their constituents, but this must be the first Tory leadership contest to be held on Russia’s border. It is hard to imagine a more subtle and dangerous moment for such antics than now. Ukraine is facing some of the most horrific atrocities since World War II and the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. There is no excuse for what Putin is doing to his neighbor. But the burning issue is not the horror of war. It’s what can be done to stop it. It is, of course, appropriate for a desperate Ukraine to claim that the current conflict threatens to spread beyond its borders and into Europe more widely. In fact, Ukraine has been experiencing an separatist conflict for eight years. This conflict did not require the involvement of the rest of Europe or the United States. But Trash says Putin wants to bring about “untold suffering throughout Europe.” It offers no evidence of a gross and worrying case, with the implicit need for Western military retaliation. Putin can be a monster and a liar, and we are right to send aid to the people he oppresses, but a general will have to look beyond insults to assess the dangers and opportunities on the ground. This moment of greatest danger requires all the crisis and the ability to resolve Cuba closely in 1962. We must remember then that both sides had to climb. So far in this conflict, NATO has operated with impressive self-discipline. It has defined the parameters of its assistance to Ukraine and insists on them. Two decades of highly provocative NATO encirclement of Russia have stalled in Georgia and Ukraine, knowing that further progress would permanently ignite Moscow. NATO stayed away from Russian occupation of Crimea and Donbas. Putin’s attack on Kyiv this spring was of a different order, but NATO again rated its response. He was able to present a united front in Russia, while not calling on Moscow to counterattack beyond the borders of Ukraine. Neither Western sanctions nor military aid to Ukraine seem to have prevented Putin from doing so. They have greatly increased the cost to Russia of its invasion, but as Western democracies are well aware, the cost of military adventures does not always affect politics. Putin will settle when and when he feels he has reached his military limit, so there is good reason to send weapons to Kyiv. It is also a reason for the common humanity of welcoming Ukrainian refugees, which Johnson’s immigration policy has hypocritically denied. None of this is a reason for the desire to continue the conflict, let alone risk NATO being dragged into the struggle. Among other things, a war with NATO would greatly boost Putin’s domestic popularity. As pointed out in the 2015 Minsk talks and discussed in Istanbul in March, there must be a compromise if there is not to be constant anxiety. A possible deal should include Ukraine’s security and a degree of autonomy for Donbass. This will be messy. He can not give Putin the victory, but he would probably recognize the “Russianness” of Crimea and southeastern Ukraine, if not Odessa. There were indications that Zelensky would accept such a thing. However, it is precisely such an outcome that Johnson and Trace are now opposing, hoping to boost support from warlords – and defense lobbyists – within the Tories. The atrocities imposed by states on other states must always be condemned by the wider world. But condemnation is another thing, the battle with the other. When states interfere in the affairs of others they are usually, if not always, bloody and unsuccessful. Ukraine seems to be approaching what could be a final battle with Russia in the south, which will probably be followed by a stalemate and some sort of settlement. The worst thing Zelensky could face are the Western allies in the US and Britain, led by politicians Joe Biden and Johnson, who feel they are too weak at home to support him in peace compromises. Johnson and Trash have not stated that the agreement with Ukraine belongs to Zelensky and his people. They want to keep fighting for as long as it takes for Russia to be completely defeated. They need a triumph in their agent war. Meanwhile, anyone who disagrees with them can be dismissed as weak, cowardly or pro-Putin. It is heartbreaking that this conflict will have to be taken up by Britain for a miserable upcoming leadership contest.
