Time to Bring the War in Ukraine to an End

 

The Republican U.S. Senator from Ohio, J.D. Vance has publicly stated that the time has probably come to negotiate an armistice to end the War in Ukraine.

I agree with him. The opportunity for Ukraine to gain the upper hand came and went this summer and the front line has barely moved. Russia is deeply entrenched, they have access to a much larger fighting force, and the Russian economy has proven to be much more resilient than many expected. If Ukraine persists in seeking to regain all the territory seized by the Russians, they risk losing the entire country.

What might this armistice look like? First of all, Ukraine needs security guarantees from NATO and economic guarantees from the EU. For these reasons I support Ukrainian accession to both organizations. The Russians must repay Ukraine for the death and destruction inflicted in their illegal military operation, and the sanctions regime against Russia must continue until that debt is satisfied.

Will it be possible to negotiate an agreement with Russia that provides Ukraine with all the guarantees that it needs? I believe that it is possible. Russia has achieved is main military objective, which was to secure their claim to the Crimean Peninsula. The Ukrainians have only lost regions that have been historically pro-Russian (with certain crucial exceptions, such as in the area around Mariupol). And, both the EU and NATO largely favor Ukrainian membership, even though there do exist certain prominent detractors such as Orban in Hungary. 

What might happen if Ukraine continues to fight to a stalemate with Russia without a negotiated peace agreement? There are many possible outcomes, but a few seem salient:

• Western support for Ukraine wanes and the tide of war shifts to the Russians.
• Ukrainian domestic support for the war wanes and the tide of war shifts to the Russians.
• Putin dies and is replaced by members of his party who are even more hawkish than he, leading to more war and a higher probability of the use of nuclear weapons.
• Putin dies and is replaced by a more centrist government that returns the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk to Ukraine in exchange for Ukrainian recognition of Russia's claim to Crimea.

Of these four possible outcomes, only one is favorable to the Ukrainians and the West. It should be pointed out that the Ukrainians have prosecuted this war honorably and admirably. If the new borders of Ukraine are redrawn along the current lines of engagement the Ukrainians should feel no shame.

Hamas Needs to Lay Down Their Arms NOW

After launching their suicidal, murderous and self-defeating incursion into Israel (dubbed the “Al Aqsa Flood”), Hamas fighters have continued to fight the Israelis by any means at their disposal, even as Gaza crumbles around them. 

Their resistance is futile. If their aim is to continue antagonizing Israel until every square meter of the Gaza Strip is pulverized, then they are achieving that goal. But why would Hamas want to see Gaza in ruins and many thousands of women and children dead?

Informal analysis of Al Jazeera coverage shows that the Arabic-language feed offers footage of Hamas guerrilla fighters sporting Go Pro cameras poking their heads out to launch RPGs against IDF targets, and the English-language feed offers footage of the injuries that result from IDF responses to Hamas attacks. In other words, Al Jazeera is providing a message of "glorious resistance to the occupiers" to their Arab audience and a message of human suffering to their Western audience. These two messages cannot be separated, since the violent uprising in Gaza precipitated the IDF bombardment and subsequent invasion and every subsequent violent action by Hamas seems guaranteed to trigger a disproportionate reaction by the IDF.

Why is Hamas all but guaranteeing the complete destruction of Gaza and its inhabitants? Hamas seems to be desperately trying to draw neighboring countries into the fight to trigger a wider Middle East war. However, apart from increased activity by Hezbollah on the border with Lebanon and attacks by the Houthi rebels in Yemen, no other Middle East country has shown even the least inclination to wade into the conflict, which is quite understandable. Lebanon, Syria, and to a lesser extent Iran are all in the midst of severe economic crises. In Lebanon this is the result of serious economic mismanagement and the failure of democratic institutions. In Syria it is the result of the ongoing civil war, and in Iran it is the result of international sanctions.  While it is true that there may be a tipping point beyond which the anguish in the Muslim world grows so great that all instincts for self-preservation are cast aside and a wider war erupts, the longer the conflict goes on the less likely the outcome becomes.

While Hamas prays for a wider war, Gaza is getting pulverized, and its inhabitants buried under the rubble. As long as Hamas is able to resist the IDF the Israelis will not let up. Before every last Hamas fighter achieves martyrdom, I estimate that well over 100,000 non-combatants will be dead and the Gaza Strip will be completely uninhabitable. The "Al Aqsa Flood" has drowned Gaza in blood.

For that reason, I believe that the best course of action is for Hamas to lay down their arms and negotiate a cessation of the violence so that a process of healing and reconstruction can begin for a Gaza Strip that is demilitarized and free from violence.