Why all the resistance to defeating Putin?

President Trump has made it his mission to stop the killing around the world. It is a noble policy, and one that could get him a well-deserved Nobel Peace Prize. Though unreported by Trump resistance movement media, his administration has already had unprecedented and remarkable success – brokering cease fires or peace agreements between Israel/Iran, Armenia/Azerbaijan, Congo/Rwanda, Cambodia/Thailand, Ethiopia/Egypt and Serbia/Kosovo. The Abraham Accords also ended the state of war between Sudan and Israel.

Yet, the most visible and most deadly conflicts have carried on – Putin’s dirty little war against Ukraine and the Hamas provoked war with Israel.  In both conflicts, the United States has close allies and significant national security interests.  In both cases, Trump has expressed his displeasure with allies President Zelenskyy and Prime Minister Netanyahu – unwisely on occasion.

For now, I am putting aside the Hamas/Israeli conflict for a later commentary and focusing on Ukraine and what America and NATO should be doing.

It seems perfectly clear at this point that if Trump wants to end the Ukraine situation with a ceasefire and eventually a lasting peace he must recognize  that a negotiated piecemeal ceasefire agreement is no longer an option. Putin has no intention of giving up his plan to take over Ukraine – and other former Soviet captive nations.  Even a ceasefire would only be used by Putin to build up his forces for future conquests.

The only way to truly end the conflict is to defeat Putin.  That means he must be forced to surrender.  We should have learned the lesson of dealing with an insanely ambitious maniacal leader when British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain negotiated the infamous “peace in our time” deal with Adolf Hitler that preceded the invasion of Poland.

At this time, Putin seems convinced that America and NATO are weaklings – unwilling to use their enormous overwhelming military power.  They can be intimidated by nuclear saber rattling.   Putin has every reason to believe that since America has engaged in wars of attrition culminating in humiliating withdrawals and surrenders since the yet unsettled Korean War 75 years ago – and nothing America or NATO has threatened or done has dissuaded him..

Russia built the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on western reticence.   It was not until President Reagan’s policy of pushing back against Soviet imperialism that there was a reversal in Russian fortunes — and the entire Soviet Union was brought down.  He did that without going to war with Russia, but rather through diplomacy and credible threats.  Unfortunately, it is too late for that with Putin.   He is not a Gorbachev.  He is a Hitler.  The war has already been launched and sadly, the United States has lost credibility.

It seems that the only way for Trump to save the most lives is to win the war.  Yes, that means lives lost in the short run, but it would prevent more deadly wars in the future.  Hitler was not defeated by negotiations.  He was defeated on the battlefield.

In previous commentaries, I have explained why such as Russian defeat would look like.   It means:

• The end of the shooting.
• All Russian forces must be removed from Ukraine’s recognized pre-invasion borders.
• All kidnapped children must be returned to their Ukrainian families.
• Russia must be made to pay reparations for damage, crippling injuries and loss of life.
• Most sanctions on Russia remain unless Putin abdicates to an acceptable successor.
• Admission of Ukraine into NATO.
• The World Court continues to pursue war criminal charges unless Putin abdicates.

Fat chance, you might say.  But only if we continue to pursue a negotiation-at-all-costs strategy instead of a victory strategy. And what would the latter look like.  It would start by giving Putin 30 days to agree to an unconditional ceasefire and the removal of troops from Ukraine.  Based on his probable refusal to comply, the United States and NATO would:

• Begin the shipment of the most advanced massive military weapons and ammunition to Ukraine, including offensive weapons that can reach deep into Mother Russia.
• Imposition of massive sanctions — the kind that will seriously undermine the Russian economy.
• Seizure of Russian international financial assets to be turned over to Ukraine to finance  the war.
• Declare a no-fly zone over Ukraine that NATO nations would enforce.
• Support Ukrainian attacks deep in Russia — hitting military, industrial, energy targets, and even attacks on Moscow.  (Turnabout if fair play.)
• Rather than just “scrambling”, nations such as Poland and Estonia would shoot down Russian aircraft violating sovereign airspace.
• Impose sanctions on nations providing troops to Russia, such as North Korea.
• Increased sanctions on nations violating American sanctions on Russia.
• Interdiction of arms shipments to Russia (Yes, that means sinking ships or blowing up trains).
• Interdiction of pipelines and ships exporting oil from Russia.
• Provide increased intelligence services.
• Lifting the “no boots on the ground” prohibition – although we may never have to send in soldiers.

Under this policy, Ukraine would remain as the key combatant, with NATO nations providing most of the back-up, such as enforcing the no-fly zone.  The United States would have a limited role militarily, other than supplying weapons and imposing sanctions.

We can understand Trump’s hope that after the fighting ceases in Ukraine, we can maintain a cooperative relationship with Russia in such matters as fighting terrorism, commerce and trade, space exploration.  That would be nice, but not at the cost of American world leadership and national security. 

That is how it was before the war with Hitler.  We had a strong isolationist culture and business leaders eager to do business with Germany.  The isolationist sentiment was so strong that President Roosevelt promised that “Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars”.  He said that in Boston in 1940 – just a year before America entered the war  in Europe and in Asia.

It is sad to think that perhaps the greatest obstacle to defeating Putin is Trump and his willingness to cling to a dangerous isolationist policy and to be outsmarted and humiliated by the Madman of Moscow.  Trump’s reputation for being a tough guy and brilliant negotiator is nowhere to be found in his dealings with Putin.

So, there ‘tis.