Apart from the obvious, is there an emerging problem involving nuclear weapons?
Events of the past week have been so earth shattering that I started to address the issue from a somewhat philosophical point of view. Times have changed and, arguably, they have become a licence for tyrants to wage war. The use, or even threaten, to use nuclear weapons would, as Putin stated, bring destruction such as the world has never seen.
So, in plain language, are they indeed a licence for tyrants to do as they wish and invade neighbouring territories? If Europe, supported by America, had sent troops to help the Ukrainians the result might well have been nuclear war. That is the argument for refusing to introduce no fly zones over Ukraine.
Today one of President Zelensky’s inner circle speaking to the BBC described NATO as “weak”. He is right on two fronts. NATO countries failed to assess the Russian threat or to prepare for it over many years. The root cause was cost and a lack of unified purpose but, more importantly, fear of provoking nuclear war.
Philosophers have numerous views on the causes and nature of war but the conclusion most politicians and media have reached with regard to Ukraine is that Russia is controlled by a madman. That should in fact be ‘madmen’ for no dictator rules alone.
Ancient Greek philosophers’ views of war are little different to those of their modern day counterparts. However, today nuclear weapons have brought mankind to a point where the Russian invasion of Ukraine may not be the last such territory grab.
If, having succeeded in Ukraine, Russia should invade Finland or another borderland country what would NATO do threatened, as it certainly would be, with “destruction such as you have never seen” were it to interfere?
Politicians in Europe have failed big time. They have put their faith in a US led defence organisation. EU countries have ignored the threat from the East and failed to properly finance their defence structures. The US under Donald Trump began to weaken its support for NATO on the basis that countries should pay for their defence and not rely on the US.
One certainty is that Vladimir Putin, mad or not, together with his military leaders calculated correctly that America would not want to send forces to assist Ukraine. Reports last week suggested that a Republican Convention did not mention Ukraine simply condemning President Joe Biden as not up to the job. More worrying was the suggestion that Donald Trump made a complimentary remark about Vladimir Putin.
Reports suggest that the American public do not want to go to war in Europe. It seems they too are concerned about starting a nuclear confrontation.
The French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau on the question of international politics argued that states must be strong or they decline and founder. His view was that attempts at peaceful federations are futile.
On Friday the United Nations General Assembly heard that a representative was heading to Iran to assess their status concerning nuclear development. Perhaps China will have noted NATO’s hesitancy, and that of the US in particular, in its determination to “win back” Taiwan.
Yesterday US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told the BBC that Ukraine could win, saying “over time absolutely”. The world hopes he is right, if not Mr Blinken and his country should remember that Alaska was once part of Russia.
———— Dateline: The Corner Cafe, Deal, Kent, UK ————
Follow EU Today on Social media:
