By Dave Wilkin
The Russia-Ukraine war has bogged down into a grinding destructive conflict. NATO country leaders continue to pledge to back Ukraine for ‘as long as it takes’, claiming that Russia’s war threatens the ‘international rules-based order’. Is this true? Framing it this way certainly plays well in the Western media, helping to keep the public onside, but it’s overly simplistic. The real picture is far more complex and dangerous.
The war would have ended by now with a Russian military victory, had the US-led NATO countries not provided increasingly more powerful weapons to Ukraine. Can Ukraine defeat Russia, pushing them out completely, including from the ethnic Russian-leaning eastern Donbas and Crimea, under Russian control since 2014? Russia still has military superiority, their battlefield missteps notwithstanding. So far, President Putin has not deployed Russia’s full military capability in all-out war. If that changed, much more of Ukraine would be destroyed, with a far higher loss of life. Not a desired outcome for Russia, not for now at least.
Will discontent within Russia force Putin to withdraw? Unlikely, as neither sanctions nor embarrassing battlefield losses have changed his calculus, almost a year in. His approval rating is above 80%, having risen since the war began, just as it did after the 2014 annexation of Crimea. As for a military coup, very unlikely. Even if it happened, the leadership that follows is unlikely to let Ukraine fall into NATO hands. That would be seen as an existential threat to Russia.
To understand why you need to look at the history and geography involved. Russian-Ukrainian bonds date back well over 1000 years. The Council on Foreign Relations sums it up this way: “Russia has deep cultural, economic, and political bonds with Ukraine, and in many ways Ukraine is central to Russia’s identity and vision for itself in the world”.
Kyiv sits just 200 km from the Russian border and about 800 km from Moscow, with only rolling plains between them. As multiple European wars have shown, geography proved highly problematic for Russian security in Europe -e.g. they suffered the most fatalities by far in WWII, an estimated 24,000,000 (Canada by comparison, 44,000). Additionally, Sevastopol, Crimea has been the home port of Russia’s strategic Black Sea Fleet, for over 200 years. It is a critical part of Russian regional maritime power and its national security architecture.
In my opinion, the primary motivation behind Russia’s invasion was in response to the eastward expansion of NATO. Ukraine’s Western drift and its desire to join NATO, plus years of CIA meddling, brought things to a head. Given past perceived broken NATO promises not to expand, Russian fears are understandable. One analogy would be if Canada were to fall into China’s orbit, how would the US respond? The answer is pretty obvious. Putin wanted a shift in the European security architecture, to Russia’s benefit. Failing to get the guarantees, he believed the timing was right and pulled the trigger and miscalculated.
So, why does the US back Ukraine so strongly? The Russian invasion poses no direct threat to them, nor to European NATO countries. Putin is ruthless, but he knows a direct war with NATO is one he can’t win. The US responses are driven for geopolitical power reasons – containing, weakening and ultimately defeating Russia remains their strategic goal. They cast Putin’s Russa in a similar light to WWII Nazi Germany. The US prides itself as the ‘just’ defender of the free world. Yet, its military engagements have been dismal, especially in the Middle East post 9/11, where almost 1 million have perished and 40 million were displaced due to wars stemming from US foreign policy. They can ill afford another chaotic war, especially in Europe, against Russia, but that is precisely where things are going.
Now the rise of China raises the stakes enormously, seriously threatening US hegemony. The US needs to show strength, sending a message to both Moscow & Beijing that they, and NATO, won’t back down, even if it means continuing major disruption to the global economy, more death and destruction in Ukraine, and risks of global escalation. How sad.
US warnings to China don’t go over well in Beijing. China remains undeterred in their global expansion ambitions, especially in the South China Sea and towards Taiwan. Ukraine’s similarities to Taiwan are eerie. Both are viewed as historic parts of a larger motherland, but unlike Ukraine, Taiwan is tiny, sitting just 100 miles off the China coast, not easily able to receive US supplies in a war.
Is Russia bluffing with its nuclear escalation threats if it faulters on the battlefield? It’s not impossible, as Putin is in so deep, and looking more desperate. If Russia fails, it will likely lead to significant internal destabilization, very dangerous given they have the world’s largest nuclear weapon arsenal. If Russia starts losing the war, it would be due to NATO offensive weapons escalation, and Xi Jinping would likely be forced to move, backing Russia militarily, not just economically. It’s better than the nuclear option risk. It’s clearly in China’s strong interest for Russia to prevail, given their strategic partnership, mutual US disdain/distrust, and proximity. War is inherently unpredictable, and China’s engagement could easily escalate into a world war.
Now we see that Germany will send its Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine (allowing other NATO members to do as well), and the US is close to agreeing to send its Abrams M1 tanks. This will enable a Ukrainian offensive to reclaim lost territory, but It’s a significant and risky escalation.
This war needs to end now. A cease-fire followed by a compromise peace agreement is the rational way forward. Given our history as a voice of reason, Canada should be able to see this and refrain from shipping more deadly offensive weapons to Ukraine. It should be a voice of reason and a champion for peace.
Dave Wilkin is a Professional Engineer, with a master’s degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Toronto. His career spans over 40 years in Information Technology, banking, and energy. He is currently a co-owner in a small energy consulting company and lives in Huntsville, Ontario.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
John Earl says
“ This war needs to end now. A cease fire followed by a compromise peace agreement is the rational way forward.” I’m afraid Mr. Wilkin this I’m my opinion will never happen. The democratic & Free rest of the world will never give into Russia’s destroying of Ukraine, it’s just so terribly sad the killings and destruction on both sides that have been taking place. I just pray & hope that all of us and all supporting countries never waver from supporting Ukraine and its people.
I would really like to hear from my HHS history teacher on his opinion regarding this . Please Mr. Kear offer what your comments are. Thanks
David Carbonari says
With all due respect to Mr. Wilkin, I could not disagree with his argument more.
Ukraine is a sovereign country that was invaded by a tyrannical and murderous dictator determined to expand his territory and influence at any cost.
Arguing in favour of a negotiated compromise excuses Putin’s war of aggression. It also rewards him for his actions and enables him to simply move on to the next target.
I think we should be listening to the Ukrainians and if they want to fight it’s our moral responsibility to ensure we do everything possible to support them.
If Mr. Wilkin’s hypothetical scenario of an American invasion of Canada were to transpire & Canadians were to put up a valiant and dogged resistance, how much Canadian territory would he suggest we cede to the US under those circumstances? Perhaps Ontario & Quebec? Or maybe just the maritimes? What about BC and AB?
History has shown, time and time again, that there’s no such thing as negotiating with a homicidal, expansionist dictator. They must be defeated on the battlefield.
I would be ashamed and humiliated if any Canadian politician argued in favour of capitulation to Vladimir Putin.
I suggest Mr. Wilkin answer his phone, Lord Halifax is calling and he wants his foreign policy back.
Me? I’ll stick with the Churchillians in this struggle against terror and tyranny.
Jim Logagianes says
It begs the question
Why is NATO escalating a war with Russia by refusing to compromise ? If you don’t like Putin wait till the hardliners in the communist party take over and the gloves come off. Russia has a nuclear arsenal readied for deployment. How many more innocent people will die if this conflict continues? Is NATO trying to escalate the war by arming countries on Russia’s borders?
Could it be that the economies of every industrialized nation in the world are facing serious consequences due to poor economic policies. All these countries have one thing in common uncontrollable deficit spending.
Are they going to use the war as and excuse to create a digital currency that can be manipulated with the stroke of a key.
The leaders of the world are being used as pawns in a very dangerous way and the consequences will be enormous and devastating if a resolution is not found.
Being extremely curious and not accepting the narratives being presented to justify a world war might be warranted under these circumstances.
Hugh Mackenzie says
I respectfully disagree with Dave Wilkin and agree with the comments from David Carbonari and John Earl. A compromise solution may be a short term strategy but in the end will change the world-wide balance of power. The bottom line here is that we must stand up to bullies and tyrants or eventually suffer the consequences. I do agree that the United Nations has a role to play here but it is one of defeating the aggression of Russia and that will never happen as long as Russia has a veto at the U.N.
Thomas R Spivak says
My grandparents on my fathers side came to Canada from Ukraine and my mothers side from Russia.
Their migration was in large part a result of the constant conflicts and ethnic rivalries that were going on in both countries. The promise of free land and a way of life that was free of the issues in the homeland were a huge draw for both groups.
Too many people, I think, view Ukraine as a little country to the east that we don’t need to worry about but this is a country with a population greater than Canada and a GDP of 348 billion US dollars .
The narrow view of this being a political push by Russia to stop the spread of NATO is simplistic as it doesn’t account for the historical record of Russia trying to eradicate every vestige of the Ukrainian people as was mandated by Catherine “The Great” 250 years ago. Her efforts to modernize Ukraine proved to be brutal, making the language illegal, destroying all written records and books, and smashing down all resistance in the same methods as used by Putin today.
Let us not forget that Stalin killed nearly 4 million Ukrainians during the 30s to promote collectivism and tamp down the Ukrainian nationalism. Old habits die hard.
This is a war about territory, money, and power by the largest “Mafia” on the planet.
Putin is following a brutal game plan that Russia has historically used for centuries and if he isn’t stopped now Russia will bit by bit eat away at the region until it eventually has all its former block nations under its control.
Trying to compare the actions of the previous Ukraine government under Viktor Yanukovych , imply CIA involvement, and cherry pick bits of information from various media sites is a dangerous path to trying to understand what is happening here. It’s certain that the Trump administration didn’t help matters and most certainly made it worse, but the Obama and Clinton administrations didn’t help either.
If we are so bold as to give opinions as Mr. Wilkin’s has, I don’t think China has an interest in being involved in this conflict despite their actions in the pacific arena. Their trade dependence on the west is extremely important and there is little to gain by supporting Russia in Ukraine. If they were going to move they would have done so already.
Mr. Earl and David Carbonari are exactly right, and cease fires never resolve anything nor do they prevent hostilities. Further, Putin has no interest in any solution that doesn’t give him what he wants or a large part of it.
Once again, bit by bit.
Mr. Wilkin’s disjointed narration on the surface seems to be implying that we or the US should not be involved in the foreign policy in the middle east, the pacific, or Europe because we cannot be trusted? Perhaps we should have let Japan have Hawaii, let Hitler have Europe, and let Russia put nuclear weapons in Cuba? We’ve had failures in foreign policy, but we must try never the less.
There are 4 million people of Ukrainian heritage in this country that I’m pretty sure will agree with me and not with Mr. Wilkin.
David Carbonari says
A smaller, weaker country arming itself in defense of its territory is anything but an “escalation”. Viewing the provision of tanks to Ukraine as anything but entirely appropriate and long overdue is crazy to me.
The Russians have been using tanks since Day 1. It’s taken far too long for the democracies of the world to step up and ensure the Ukrainians are also armed with mobile armour.
The argument put forth by Mr. Wilkin and Mr. Logagianes, if extended to other situations, would hold that the Lend-Lease program during WW2, which armed the Soviets and Brits, was an “escalation”. Imagine arguing that providing US Sherman tanks to the USSR to use against Nazi Germany was somehow inappropriate? It’s like saying the Afghans “escalated” the war against the Soviets in the 1980s by using US arms, or that the Viet Cong “escalated” the war against the US by using Chinese arms.
When war is brought to your doorstep by an aggressor defending oneself is not an escalation in any way, shape or form.
Dave Wilkin says
In response to some of the comments here, let me clarify. I am not saying that the West ought to yield to dictators like Putin, giving up on Ukraine. Western mistakes for decades led to the current state of Putin’s Russia, and the rise of communist China. (https://doppleronline.ca/huntsville/the-world-order-is-changing-is-canada-prepared-commentary/). Navigating in today’s shifted world order takes time and careful long-term policy moves. Some encouraging signs are emerging, including reducing dependencies on China manufacturing, Russian natural resources, NATO spending increases/reduced dependency on the US etc.
Putin is not an empire building communist (like Stalin) or China’s Xi Jinping today. He’s a nationalist, czarist like, seeking to hold on to power, trying to restore Russian pride and power. Dangerous to be sure, but China is more concerning, long-term. Western responses have pushed China and Russia even closer together than before.
Washington is loaded with players seeking to leverage US military might. It’s predictable and fully understandable, but also easier to justify when its not America that’s being destroyed in the process. First, lighter arms & munitions, then medium arms, then HIMARS and Patriot missiles, now heavy tanks, with talks of F-16s & AWACS and longer-range missiles. As explained, a quick Ukrainian victory is unrealistic and wars involving global powers is fraught with risks for mistakes and spiralling escalation, a slippery slope to world war and/or nuclear weapons.
Dave Wilkin says
For a good discussion on ending the war, this discussion on TVO is worth a listen. In particular, Janice Stein from the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto lays out the risks and a better path forward quite well.
https://www.tvo.org/video/what-would-make-peace-possible-in-ukraine
Thomas R Spivak says
This comment ” Putin is not an empire building communist (like Stalin) or China’s Xi Jinping today. He’s a nationalist, czarist like, seeking to hold on to power, trying to restore Russian pride and power.” could not be further from the truth, Russia was a weakly institutionalized, fragile, and in many ways distorted proto-democracy in the 1990s. Russia claimed itself to be a democratic, federative, law-based state with a republican form of government.
Russia under Vladimir Putin has moved back in the direction of a highly centralized authoritarianism, which has characterized the state for most of its 1,000-year history.
Putin is a dangerous dictator that kills or imprisons those who defy him.
Prior to WW2 Neville Chamberlain claimed he had made peace with Adolph Hitler all the while in the years prior Hitler was re arming and claiming new territories.
Putin is no different, history does repeat itself, and hopefully we will not see decisions that give up Ukraine once again made by people with your shallow protectionist view.
When Greece was invaded by the Italians in 1940 should Allied powers have stayed out of it Jim?
The Germans and Italians slaughtered Greeks the same as Putin is doing to the Ukrainians now.
Australians, New Zealanders, and Brits came to their aid and eventually with the help of the resistance movement made Greece untenable for the Axis powers.
We must stand up to Putin and Russia, to do otherwise will come back to bite us in the a**.
Alan Perry says
This war is defending Ukraine ‘s sovereignty and this war is a defense of democracy. Maybe Mr Wilkin needs to spend some time living under the rule af this tyrant to see exactly what its like to be deprived of his democratic rights to see actually how many of the Russian people actually support Putin and how many of the people are scared into Putins high approval numbers. I stand with Ukraine 🇺🇦 and the help NATO is giving them .
Jim logagianes says
Mr Wilkin realizes War is not the answer thank goodness.
The Americans have never been invaded by a foreign power. But they have invaded several nations throughout history while the U. N. Sat silent. And the world sat by watching millions of lives being extinguished needlessly pretending to support stability around the world while flexing their military superiority.
I find it inconceivable that human beings think it is alright to kill other human beings.
That somehow War is the only solution to the current escalation in Ukraine. Why is it that humans never learn from the past? The atrocities committed in Afghanistan are a stark reminder that military intervention does not work. But every time it happens innocent people die needlessly.
If you are in possession of a nuclear arsenal and your lives are threatened by foreign military intervention from several nations are you going to lay down your arms or will you unleash a fury never witnessed before on this planet that has the potential to destroy all human life. Desperate people will resort to desperate measures when it is forced upon them that’s why it is commonly referred to as War.
Russia is not Libya it won’t be a walk in the park. Who in their right mind would start a war with a country that has nuclear capabilities?
And after it’s over and the world is no longer inhabitable the poor souls remaining on our scorched earth will wish they had never supported a War effort.
Sadly Maxine Bernier’s Peoples Party is the only federal party not supporting the war effort in Ukraine. I will exercise my right to vote by not supporting any party who supports the Ukrainian offensive.
Which means if you elect a Conservative or a Liberal ,or and NDP government you support the war effort and have the blood of innocent lives on your hands.
After the next federal election in Canada it will become obvious who in this country has a callous disregard for human life.
Enjoy watching the atrocities on T V . You may get to witness them first hand in the near future.
Be careful what you wish for.
Grant Edwards says
I strongly disagree with Mr. Wilkins. Having been an educator for over 30 years, as a History teacher, Vice-Principal and Principal, I am dumbfounded by his comments. When we tried to negotiate with Hitler, (Putin is making the exact same arguments as Hitler), it didn’t work out so well. This not a NATO issue, that is Putin’s narrative of the day (remember at first he said it was to wipe out Nazi’s in Ukraine), this is opposition to a self serving invader, the only negotiation with a dictator is their surrender or their complete retreat from ALL of Ukraine.
Murray Christenson says
Mr Wilkin…or should I say, Lord Chamberlain…you lose all credibility when you put peace, and rational in the same sentence of a discussion involving Russia.
Allen Markle says
About a year ago, I wrote that this war wouldn’t last. The might of Russia arrayed against the smaller Ukraine seemed to present an impossible situation. It’s still a question, but who could have predicted the tenacity and ability to absorb the punishment, that has been inflicted upon the Ukrainian people.
The western world has never had much liking for the Russian Bear. Churchill was of the opinion at the end of WWII, that the Allies would have to now defeat the beast, or there would be no peace. But the world was weary of war. Now the western world has the chance to back a fighter, from a distance. A war by proxy.
So, I guess my opinion is born from what has been reported; that I can read and view, and develop my prejudice from. I read the segment about the ‘international rules based order’, which I believe can only exist after there is a winner. Who stops to recall the rules when your life is the ante? Fire ’til it stops banging, and hope you are the one that remains, and not be the remains.
Atrocities are surely being committed by both sides, because this is war. And a war of attrition. What other reason causes an army to focus on civilian targets. We did it in WWII, with the carpet bombing and fire bombing of German and Japanese cities. And for that same reason, Russia chooses targets in this conflict; to break the desire of the people to fight. Why else would you free convicts (shades of “The Dirty Dozen”) and conscript them into mercenary groups such as Wagner?
But the Allies won WWII and Nuremburg was where the winner applied the ‘rules’.
Western nations are supplying vast quantities of ordinance to the Ukraine, finding it convenient to back a fighter, rather than be the fighter. The Ukrainians still seem willing to do that fighting, amazing as that seems. But I guess, what are the limits when it’s your very existence is in question? They have certainly proven to be a formidable foe.
Back in the day, Edwin Starr’s song ‘War’ says “Peace and love and understanding, tell me
Is there no place for them today?”
Grand ideal to be sure, but man still chooses war, or has it chosen for him.
Mine is certainly a prejudiced view, but I do wish them peace, those Ukrainians.
Keep the faith all.
Hugh Holland says
Putin and his fellow oligarchs have stolen trillions from the Russian people over the last 20 years.
Funny how everyone who opposes Putin gets poisoned or “accidentally” falls out of a high rise window.