Putin's Unjust Justifications for Invading Ukraine
His equivocations may fool some, let's try to fix that
Putin has trotted out a few different excuses for why Russia is justified in invading and taking over Ukraine.
Historical Destiny
A long time ago, between the 17th and 19th centuries, the Russian Empire grew greatly and did indeed encompass, through war, many current independent nations including Ukraine. He has publicly used this history as an absurd justification. His only possible reasons for it are to soften gullible minds for later when he then turns his sights on other nations, such as Estonia, Latvia, and Poland, as some kind of historical destiny. But if that was a valid justification then it could equally be used by many other powers. For example, Britain would be justified in new invasions of India, much of Africa, and of course the Untied States since they were all part of the British Empire at its peak!
So clearly Putin’s ramblings on this score are laughable.
Protecting ethnic Russians within Ukraine
Really? I have no doubt there are frictions between ethic Russians and Ukrainians, just as there are in many nations around the world between various other ethnicities. That is a universal problem to be sure. But to claim that as an excuse for military invasion? Seriously? That is an internal Ukrainian issue, but one that has at least in part been caused by Russia’s repeated interference there, including the invasion and take-over of the Crimea and Donbass regions several years ago. Or in short, Putin is using the consequences of his own previous invasion to justify this one. Just to up these silly stakes, he has the nerve to call the people of a nation who elected a Jewish leader, a bunch of Nazis.
Equivocating Conquest with Choice
The most important issue and biggest justification is his alleged “fear” of NATO. In order to put this one over on us, he likens NATO to a nation intent on expanding by conquering land after land, and thus fears having the “nation” of NATO on his doorstep, that NATO, as such, constitutes a threat to the sovereignty of the Russian nation.
In a speech prior to the current invasion, he alleged that there were promises that neither Russia nor NATO would expand, and that Russia has kept its promise while NATO has not.
But NATO does not expand through the use of force, and in its entire history it has never initiated aggression on any nation. It has always been, in intent and in deed, a defensive pact that independent sovereign nations can choose to join - or not. Its only purpose is to provide a stronger defense of member nations in the case of aggression by an enemy - at the time of its incarnation, that being primarily the Soviet Union, who were busy expanding - by conquering land after land through force.
Thus the only “threat” that NATO represents to Putin is as an obstacle to expanding his empire through conquest. Ukraine is an independent sovereign nation. As such it has the absolute right, in representing and defending its people, to apply for membership in NATO if it chooses. Putin has decided to violently invade before Ukraine is able to become a NATO member. He has decided he somehow has a right to kill 1000s of people, and to destroy the property and prosperity of millions, in order to prevent a bordering nation to better defend itself in future from him.
With this package-deal of equating NATO with an expansionist aggressor nation, he obliterates the distinction between self-defense and aggression and thus any right to self-defense; he obliterates the right of an independent sovereign nation to exist apart from his goal of empire, and he is guilty of the very actions he claims he fears from NATO - violent military aggression.
Of course the only real reason he wants Ukraine is because of its vast resources, of its access to the Black Sea, of having to pay Ukraine for transport of Russian oil through its territory, and because, quite simply, a free and successful Ukraine represents a slap in the face to the former Soviet Union and to Putin personally.
Why he needs to be stopped
While economic sanctions will certainly cause hardship for Russian citizens, including many of their oligarchs who may now have a hard time accessing their off-shore wealth, I cannot repeat enough that Putin really does not care! If he gave a damn about his own citizens’ well-being he would not be killing Ukrainians and stealing their land.
If we, collectively as people and nations, allow Putin to get away with this, after which relations will gradually normalize and the invasion becomes a done deal not to be reversed, it is the same appeasement that allowed the German Third Reich to expand considerably before Britain and other nations were finally able to say “No more” and work to undo that damage.
Appeasement does not EVER work. It merely emboldens the aggressor.
If and when the world finally has had enough and has the balls to say “No more”, after he has continued his expansion into any number of other nations, it will also cost magnitudes more in lives and wealth to defeat him and begin to undo the damage.
Allowing Putin to succeed in Ukraine simply confirms for him that the world will not stand in his way while he continues to rebuild his historic Russian Empire, whether in the form of a renewed Soviet Union, a Czarist-like form, or some other totalitarian variant. Moreover, China’s Communist regime will be rubbing their hands in glee knowing there’ll be no serious obstacles to taking over Taiwan - they’ve already annihilated Hong Kong’s independence without any interference.
The risk of military confrontation
Yes, there is a risk. If NATO or any other alliance were to declare a no-fly zone over Ukraine (and enforce it), or if any nation chooses to send in troops and arms, then it is possible this war could spread and become an actual “world” war. No sane person wants that. But a state of war already exists. That began the moment the first tank rolled past the Ukraine border. Putin has declared war on a independent sovereign nation and thus has made Russia a credible threat to ALL sovereign nations, primarily but not limited to, European nations.
Morally, none of us, none of our nations, has an obligation to step in and fight a thug like Putin. But we morally have the right to do so. We have the right to aid Ukraine and attempt to restore its independence from Russia.
So should we?
I believe we should. Putin may be a lot of things, all bad, but I do not believe he is suicidal. Even if this war escalates as a result of our military involvement, I believe the risk of nuclear war, while certainly not zero, is not very high.
But our response cannot be a token counterforce in the mere attempt to prove we can knock a few of his aircraft out of the sky, and then hope he’ll back down. That is the path to an unending war, many years, if not decades - and THAT increases the chance it might eventually become nuclear.
If we are to do it, we must be all-in with a wide coalition of nations all contributing, and it must present as an overwhelming counter-attack designed to stop his forces cold and give him no choice but to surrender. We would need to have constant missions, 24-7, dedicated to destroying every tank, every aircraft, every supply line, and air base, and if necessary, every last Russian soldier within Ukraine’s borders.
There will be collateral damage, innocent lives lost, but all of that is on Putin, he is the one that has made it necessary - the aggressor, the initiator of war, is morally responsible for ALL deaths and damage on both sides.
If we were to do this, we would send a clear message to every despot that aggression against other nations will not be accepted. Not only would be preserve Ukraine’s independence but potentially, likely, many other nations in Europe and elsewhere, including, very likely, Taiwan’s.