What’s So Funny About Peace For Ukraine?
Continuing the debate or at least trying to.
In my Substack newsletter, “Cutting Through,” I continue the discussion of U.S./NATO policy toward Ukraine. I expand on my own views and policy ideas and also take on those who support the current policy and their refusal to engage in honest debate about it, choosing instead to stifle debate with ad hominem attacks.
In a recent article for his Substack newsletter, Joe Cirincione outlines his view of why someone might disagree with the U.S.’ and NATO’s approach to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and why he thinks they’re wrong. I have known Joe for years, and I know him to be a good and thoughtful person who is genuinely and passionately interested in peace, and has done more than most to promote it. I have great respect for him, even when I disagree with him. And I disagree with much in this article of his.
Joe’s framing of the question is problematic from the first. “If you think the West caused the war in Ukraine and wants ‘to bleed Russia dry,’ or that aiding Ukraine prolongs and escalates the war, or that we can get peace by insisting on a ceasefire and negotiating a compromise on the land Russia now occupies, then it might be good for you to consider why you think this,” he writes…
