It's a new year of war in Europe. Don't blame Israel for Third World indifference to the fate of Ukraine. And don't pretend helping Israel is getting in the way of helping Ukraine. In an era of worrying if America can fight two wars at one time, our elites are fully capable of losing two wars at one time.
Washington’s pro-Israel stance undermines the legitimacy of the West’s broader reasons for supporting Ukraine in the eyes of many in the Global South. The moral argument against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine now looks like empty words, particularly in Middle East nations.
One, I think Israel's response to a Hamas rape, kidnap, and murder invasion is fully moral. Oh, you'd need lawyers to look at any individual use of force to determine legality. But overall? It's fine.
I feel sorry for the Palestinian kids stuck in that war. But that's on Hamas.
Two, the Global South, particularly in the Middle East, never gave a damn about Ukraine.
Mind you, they have their own problems. How many people outside of Africa have given a damn about any number of wars in Africa over the last thirty years? The point is, they'll get over our support for Israel.
The Global South (I guess that's what we used to call the Third World) should be jealous of the unique attention the persistently stubborn and self-destructive Palestinians get, no?
The war in Gaza will settle down to a dull roar long before Russia stops invading Ukraine. But is the war against Hamas created an opportunity for America to force Ukraine to make a bad peace?
With U.S. and European aid to Ukraine now in serious jeopardy, the Biden administration and European officials are quietly shifting their focus from supporting Ukraine’s goal of total victory over Russia to improving its position in an eventual negotiation to end the war, according to a Biden administration official and a European diplomat based in Washington. Such a negotiation would likely mean giving up parts of Ukraine to Russia.
It is astounding to observe this Western urge to claim peace for our time despite the total lack of Putin's interest in peace:
Russian officials continued to clearly state that Russia is not interested in negotiating with Ukraine or the West in good faith and intends to achieve its maximalist objectives in Ukraine.
Are we incapable of recognizing the need to defeat enemies?*
Have a super sparkly new year.
*But I would be remiss not to note that the story about a shift in Western focus that cites work to build Ukrainian fortifications isn't necessarily indicative of telegraphing passive resistance to more invasion. Fortifications also allow you to hold a portion of the front with fewer troops in order to mass an attack force. So who knows?
UPDATE (Monday): Which means that pushing it back and rubbing his nose in his mess is the only alternative:
Russian President Vladimir Putin said Russia would “never back down” in his annual year-end speech, which was set to be broadcast in each time zone shortly before midnight ahead of the new year.
But Putin will pause to reload, regardless of what gullible Westerners wish to call that.
UPDATE (Tuesday): What can F-16s for Ukraine?
Some 50-100 F-16s in Ukraine’s arsenal probably wouldn’t be the game changer that, say, HIMARS and ATACMS have proven, but they might be enough to shift the balance of power top further erode Russia’s hold over illegally seized Ukrainian territory.
As the author notes (and tip to Instapundit), on the Kherson front Ukraine might be able to use F-16s to gain air superiority. On the rest of the front I'd be happy with the effects of denying Russia control over the front lines.
The author also notes the ample spare parts for such a widely used plane. I'll add that the F-16 could be an international force as a Flying Tigers 2.0. That wasn't used to speed deployment to Ukraine. But it could be used to sustain and expand it.
UPDATE (Tuesday): I remain perplexed that Ukraine hasn't used reserve forces and ammunition to cut off one of both of Russia's pincers trying to close around Avdiivka.
Does Ukraine have a reserve force? Is Ukraine unwilling to take the risk of using artillery ammunition for this kind of offensive before American aid is renewed?
UPDATE (Wednesday): I've noted that refusing to help Ukraine defeat Russia on the battlefield gives Russia a great safety net knowing that continuing the war at worst means a draw. That means Russia can take risks to keep attacking:
A Chechen fighter on Ukraine's side from that article above: "When I hear French or German experts talking about how Russia must be saved and not be allowed to fall apart and how it can be rebuilt as a democratic state, I just shake my head." Yeah. If the West acts as the safety net for Russia's safety, Russia will take more risks than normal rather than save itself by leaving Ukraine.
Uncertainty about the long-term provision of aid to Ukraine not only risks giving Russia advantages on the battlefield but also emboldening Moscow further. It has already undermined the goal to push Russia to the negotiating table because the Kremlin now believes it can outlast the West’s will. Unless clear commitments are made in early 2024, the Kremlin’s resolve will only harden.
UPDATE (Thursday): ISW notes "several days of large-scale Russian strikes that reportedly primarily targeted Ukrainian DIB facilities and military infrastructure.[14] ISW previously assessed that reported Russian strikes against Ukrainian industrial facilities likely aim to prevent Ukraine from developing key capacities to sustain operations for a longer war effort.[15]"
UPDATE (Saturday): Ukraine's campaign against Russian-occupied Crimea continues:
Ukrainian forces are conducting a multi-day strike campaign against Russian military targets in occupied Crimea and have successfully struck several targets throughout the peninsula.
NOTE: ISW updates continue here. Also, I put war-related links and commentary in the Weekend Data Dump.
NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.
