Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Ingolf Eide's avatar

Seems to me you're right. Any attempt at achieving an agreed peace is likely to fail, quite possibly ignominiously so for at least one of the parties (probably Trump).

Nothing he could offer can meet Russia's needs after more than 2 1/2 years of fighting with victory on the battlefield within their grasp, and a horror of ending up with some sort of fresh "Minsk" arrangement.

Someone (perhaps Alexander Mercouris shortly after the election) said Trump would be best to simply walk away from Ukraine. Label the whole thing Biden's folly and suspend further military aid. He'd be off the hook politically and Ukraine would have to realistically consider its position and possibilities. The internal politics of Ukraine might begin to reassert itself.

If Trump doesn't walk away, as seems likely since if he meant to he should have done so at once, your approach of letting the conflict grind on (pending eventual exhaustion on Ukraine's part) may, paradoxically, be the least risky.

My guess is Russia sees things similarly and will avoid any radical escalation that could trigger a phase change.

Expand full comment
Salt Lick's avatar

I enjoyed your speculation and rumination on the war and the prospects for peace in the near term w/Trump and company. This open-ended approach has more application in a conflict between non-nuclear powers. That is, we can let it play out and see how things settle. I don’t think we have that luxury now. The last three years have been the slow motion run up to the final act when the pace quickens and final solutions have irreversible consequences. No one is blinking and endless, permanent war is not achievable and defeat is unimaginable.

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts