Appeasement was a bad idea in 1938, but it’s often a good idea. Ukraine would be wise to appease Russia.
Ukraine’s supporters in the United States and Europe insist that any agreement ending Kyiv’s war with Russia must not involve Ukrainian territorial concessions, or Russia will profit from an inexcusable act of aggression against its neighbor. However, demanding a return to pre-conflict borders ignores current military realities. Russian forces occupy approximately 20 percent of Ukraine’s prewar territory, and there are no signs that Kyiv’s position is likely to improve. Indeed, Ukraine’s latest offensive into Russian-held territory near Kursk has been a spectacular failure.
The long-term prospects for Ukraine in a war of attrition are not encouraging either. Western intelligence agencies issue reports showing high (probably inflated) estimates about the extent of Russian military casualties, trying to sell the message that continued fighting will prove too costly for the Kremlin. However, those same agencies curiously omit estimates of Ukrainian military casualties, an odd stance if Ukraine actually is winning the war. Russia’s prewar population was approximately 140 million, whereas Ukraine’s was less than 50 million. Worse, the drain on the latter’s population from the fighting has been severe. Experts estimate that Ukraine’s population has dropped by10 million since Russia’s February 2022 invasion: from 48 million to just over 37 million today, while Russia’s total has barely budged. Moscow’s edge in deployable military personnel and hardware is even greater. The brutal truth is that Russia is in a much better position than Ukraine to prevail in a war of attrition.
Insisting that the Kremlin return all conquered territory to Kyiv in a peace accord is profoundly unrealistic. Ukraine is almost certain to lose a war of attrition – after even more death and destruction. Western backers of Ukraine are doing their client no favor if they press Kyiv to persist in its unrealistic, maximalist demands. Recognizing an unpleasant reality and making essential policy adjustments do not constitute cowardice or feckless appeasement. It means having the wisdom to choose the best available option in a difficult situation.
An especially toxic phenomenon in world affairs has been the tendency of Western political leaders to be obsessed with the supposed lessons of the 1930s. It seems that every time a would-be challenger to any aspect of the existing U.S-directed international order surfaces, that individual is demonized as the “new Hitler.” Likewise, the country he controls supposedly poses a threat comparable to the one Nazi Germany posed. That caricature has been applied to political figures as diverse as Ho Chi Minh, Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi, and Vladimir Putin.
Hellbound and Down 