Coupla things. Seems like it's the right time to bring some balance to everyone's support for "The Borderlands", the slavic name for Ukraine.
1. Historical Context of Ethnic Tensions in Ukraine
• Ukraine has had deep ethnic and linguistic divisions for centuries, particularly between Ukrainian nationalists in the west and Russian-speaking populations in the east and south.
• The region of Donbas (Donetsk and Luhansk) and Crimea has historically had strong Russian ties and a predominantly Russian-speaking population.
• After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine inherited these divisions, which have only intensified over time.
2. Post-2014 and the Treatment of Russian-Speakers
• In 2014, after the Euromaidan coup ousted Ukraine’s pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych, the new Ukrainian government leaned heavily toward NATO and the West.
• New laws were passed restricting the Russian language in public life, education, and media—alienating the Russian-speaking population.
• The Ukrainian military, alongside ultra-nationalist militias like the Azov Battalion, engaged in heavy military campaigns in the Donbas region, where Russian-speaking separatists had declared independence.
• Thousands of civilians were caught in the crossfire, with allegations of war crimes committed by Ukrainian forces against Russian-speaking populations.
3. The Donbas War (2014-2022) Was an Ongoing Conflict
• Ukraine was already at war with its own Russian-speaking separatist regions for eight years before Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.
• The Minsk Agreements were signed to de-escalate the conflict, but Ukraine failed to fully implement them.
• Over 14,000 people died in the Donbas conflict, many of them civilians.
4. NATO Expansion and Russian Security Concerns
• Since the early 2000s, NATO has expanded eastward, despite prior Western assurances that it wouldn’t.
• Ukraine moving toward NATO membership was a red line for Russia, which views it as an existential threat.
• The U.S. and EU have played a role in influencing Ukrainian policies, making the situation not just a local conflict but part of a larger geopolitical struggle.
There are no good guys in this regional conflict. The EU's GDP is $18.35T. Russia's GDP is $2.02T. If Europe wants to stop buying Russia's gas, strengthen their military, and contain Putin, they can, and they don't need the US to do it. NATO engaging on boots on the ground (Starmer's expressed intent) opens us up to NATO Article 5.
The immoral argument of "Well we are saving money by weakening Russia" is not only illogical, it's morally repugnant.
That position should be examined- in a zero-sum game, Ukraine killing Russians in order to weaken Russia works. In the real world, America is depleting its own resources to support Ukraine, which is weakening Russia, and ignoring China, which is doing nothing. Considering Russia is now indebted to China, and China is calling the shots, Russia will have to assist China if they move on Taiwan, and America has depleted itself in money and equipment. We have weakened our position against the more able foe, China. So no, Ukraine hurting Russia at a savings of America's lives is not a good argument.
That ignores the completely morally bankrupt argument of "It's not Americans dying, it's Ukranians, so that's a win for America." All those morals and values we talk about go right out the window for this part of the argument. "Another man dying for my interests against my enemy is a good thing, and continuing that dying is by extension a good thing, because the other guys are dying too and we don't like the other guys."
BL, I am not pro-Putin, and I am not pro-Zelensky. I am pro-America. There is no rational case to be made for America's continuing involvement in this decades long conflict, and peace must be found.