Timothy Snyder on why we should thank Ukrainians
Timothy Snyder is the Richard C. Levin Professor of History at Yale University, a permanent fellow at the Institute for Human Sciences in Vienna and an expert on Russian and Eastern European history. Yesterday, he narrated an essay on his subscription-only Substack site “Thinking about . . . “ on the occasion of Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to the US and expression of gratitude for UN support. Snyder believes that we should be thanking Ukranians. Here, I summarize his ten reasons:
1. Security in Europe: Ukraine has been the victim of a long-anticipated Russian military attack, the first such attack since NATO was established, and Ukraine is fulfilling the NATO mission of European security singlehandedly on the strength of 3% of the US defense budget;
2. Audit, in practice, of the US defense budget: using US military technology* and equipment, Ukraine has won back half the territory it lost to Russia in 2022 and has thereby shown us what a portion of the US defense budget can do in the field;
3. Increasing security in the Pacific: Ukraine’s success in absorbing Russian military power serves as a caution to China in its ambition to attack and conquer Taiwan and to threaten the South China Sea by showing the difficulty in carrying out offensive military operations;
4. Helping to feed the world: before the war started, Ukraine was a major source of food for Asia and Africa, and has some of the most fertile soil on the planet and is close to ports on the Black Sea. Russia has destroyed dams, irrigation, farm fields and port facilities, and Ukraine continues to try to get food out to feed the world;
5. Making nuclear war less likely: by refusing to give in to Russian nuclear blackmail and fighting back, Ukraine shows that other nations don’t have to possess nuclear weapons in order to stand up to nuclear powers, thereby making nuclear proliferation less likely;
6. Giving democracy a chance; democracy has been in decline for most of the 21st century, and the Russian attack on Ukraine is an explicit attack on democracy that Ukraine has steadfastly resisted in the name of democracy, demonstrating the strength of democracy;
7. Talking about freedom; freedom as a way of talking about a future in which people can realize their own possibilities;
8. Modeling courage; Zelenskyy exemplified this by staying in Kyiv when it was under siege and under threat of assassination, but that’s just the most visible example of the physical and moral courage the Ukrainian soldiers and civilians show every day that they remain in, and fight for, their homeland;
9. Search for truth; journalists, scholars, writers continue to report and discuss difficult truths about their society and culture during the stress and violence of war;
10. Giving us a chance to be on the right side; our people are not in Ukraine taking the risks to resist an illegal war, but the opportunity to help is important for us in evaluating our own democracy and our place in the world.
*Snyder overlooks the critical role of Starlink technology, which is privately owned, although the Ukraine military use is paid for by US tax dollars
Joel:
The last couple of times, we did the fighting and the host country joined in with the US. When the US left, the host country collapsed. For once, we have a country which is willing to fight without our physical intervention. And the political interests fight about supplying them “materials” to fight back.
Alas, it was perhaps inevitable that the Russia-Ukraine debacle (or something like it) would happen sooner or later. Conceivably, the closeness between Trump & Putin had something to do with it. That could add to our troubles next year. Otherwise, we can hope Russia/Putin will come to their senses & all will be forgiven…
When the moon is in the Seventh House / And Jupiter aligns with Mars / Then peace will guide the planets / And love will steer the stars
Soon we’ll reach the shining river
Soon our pilgrimage will cease
Soon our happy hearts will quiver
With the melody of peace.
#5.
Sean Penn say “USA is too timid, and we should be all in on raising the nuke ante over saving Ukraine.”
Seems “real Hollywood men” don’t cower at the prospects of seeing DC LA, Chicago and NYC “nuked til they glow”*
* Cold warrior slang.
Having lived and served on several ground zeroes, I disagree with Penn.
@paddy,
I grew up in Oak Ridge TN in the 1960s and early ’70s. We were nuclear ground zero for WWIII. Everyone had a fallout shelter or a bomb shelter.
Why, exactly, should I care what Sean Penn says?
I discounted Penn.
But, I think Penn is saying, “concern for nuclear escalation is limiting US entry in to further action”.
Which is pointing out a limiting factor.
My feel, no item in Europe is worth losing DC.
@paddy,
Considering that the US and nearly all of Europe is in NATO, there really is no difference, militarily, between Europe and DC. Snyder’s point is that Ukraine’s successful resistance as a non-nuclear nation against a nuclear power should reduce the probability of nuclear blackmail on all sides.
“Ukraine’s success in absorbing Russian military power serves as a caution to China in its ambition to attack and conquer Taiwan and to threaten the South China Sea by showing the difficulty in carrying out offensive military operations…”
The assertion that China has an ambition to attack and conquer Taiwan and to threaten the South China Sea is false and malicious. A completely malicious assertion. The disdain for and prejudice against China is shameful.
@ltr,
Professor Snyder’s wariness about China is well-founded. He is a historian. He knows that Chinese troops participated in the invasion of South Korea. He knows that China invaded Vietnam on behalf of the murderous Pol Pot regime in Cambodia. He knows that China has been bellicose in its threats against Taiwan. He knows that China is creating and militarizing islands in the South China Sea to control the commerce. He doesn’t have distain for and prejudice against China, he knows the facts and evidence and is unafraid to speak out.
That said, this is a post about Professor Snyder and Ukraine, not about China. Any further posts about China that don’t directly pertain to Professor Snyder or Ukraine will be deleted. Thank you for your cooperation.
“Ukraine’s success in absorbing Russian military power serves as a caution to China in its ambition to attack and conquer Taiwan and to threaten the South China Sea by showing the difficulty in carrying out offensive military operations…”
This was the post, and any response to the post will be censored. I expected just this.
I completely understand the disdain for and hatred of China shown. The false words show just what such prejudice is.
Now for the censoring….
I doubt that conquering Taiwan is that important to Peoples Republic of China’s long term objects.
US concentration on possible invasion tends to focus US naval and air potential in the west Pacific, at the expense of other needs domestic and geopolitical.
China will gain by not invading. A few headlines that arouse the media over Taiwan benefit China, without much cost.
@ltr,
Any response to any post that is on-topic, is, as always, permitted. Any posts on this thread about China that don’t directly pertain to Professor Snyder or Ukraine will be considered hijacking the thread and be deleted. If you don’t like this policy, you are free to start your own blog. Thank you for your cooperation.
Well said.
On topic: Snyder makes a lot of good points. It was rather obvious that Putin was sure that Russia could simply walk in, capture Kyiv and take over the Ukraine with minimal resistance. The model might have been the US with its “shock and awe” in Iraq or perhaps the joint Soviet/German invasion of Poland. It was obviously not the German invasion of the Soviet Union.
“Ukraine’s success in absorbing Russian military power serves as a caution to China in its ambition to attack and conquer Taiwan and to threaten the South China Sea by showing the difficulty in carrying out offensive military operations…”
This passage was part of the post.
The assertions about China in the passage are incorrect and prejudiced, and a response would always be necessary. Prejudiced assertions about a benign 5,000 year old civilization of 1.4 billion people must be responded to. A benign 5,000 year old civilization of 1.4 billion should not be prejudicially denigrated.
Thankfully, I responded perfectly.
@ltr,
Far from being prejudiced, Professor Snyder’s wariness about China is well-founded. He is a historian. He knows that, far from being benign, Chinese troops participated in the invasion of South Korea. He knows that China invaded Vietnam on behalf of the murderous Pol Pot regime in Cambodia. He knows that China has been bellicose in its threats against Taiwan. He knows that China is creating and militarizing islands in the South China Sea to control the commerce. Professor Snyder doesn’t have disdain for and prejudice against China, he knows the facts and evidence and is unafraid to speak out. Of course, he is not attacking 1.4 billion people in doing so. He is referring to Chinese government policy, not every single Chinese person in the country.
@ltr: Care to comment on why China is supporting Russia in Ukraine?