For the West, the choice is between Ukrainian resistance and dishonor
“They could choose between war and dishonor. They have chosen dishonor, they will have war "
Thus Winston Churchill expressed himself on the fake peace obtained by Neville Chamberlain at the Munich Conference of 1938. Thus he harshly criticized the decision of the British government to cede the Czechoslovakian region of the Sudetenland into the hands of the Reich. The ending is known to all: a year later the Second World War would have broken out. The Cold War is over and the "Short Century" has taken its final blow with the collapse of the Soviet Union. A collapse that disrupted the global geopolitical order, inaugurating the new millennium. I take the liberty of bothering Churchill and his words because a new war has broken out in the heart of Europe. While not wanting to compare Putin to Hitler, I find it useful to use history and its similes to draw some lessons.
The lesson of the British premier who fought and won the Nazi regime seems to have been absorbed by the United States and the European Union. If the compactness shown by the 27 member states was not at all obvious, the strengthening of the NATO bases in the countries bordering Ukraine and the convinced military support in Kiev are even less so. At least twenty countries of the European Union, including Italy, have decided in the last week to send military aid to the Ukrainian army to defend themselves from the Russian attack. The Commission's decision to allocate 450 million euros in military aid with the Peace Stability Fund is a symbol of a newfound understanding. The choice of Chancellor Scholz, for the first time after the Second World War, to send 1,000 anti-tank rockets and 500 Stinger surface-to-air missiles represents a small revolution compared to the policy held up to now by Berlin (against the export of weapons in areas of war) and a great historic turning point for Germany.
On the contrary, if we watch our talk shows, if we read our newspapers, we realize the existence of a huge slice of intellectuals, journalists and opinion leaders who, as far as European sanctions are concerned, are of a completely different opinion. The Italian "pacifist" front is expanding, day by day, hour by hour. It includes mayors, associations, trade unions, politicians and journalists. Do you want an example? While in the main European capitals the squares filled up in support of the Ukrainian resistance and their president, hypocrisy ruled the demonstration in Rome. Under the fake banner of peace (and who wouldn't want it?) Hid ancient sentiments of anti-Americanism and masked anti-Westernism. "Neither with NATO nor with Putin" , "Italy out of NATO" , read the placards of some demonstrators. Many proudly waved the Communist flag, others, with a triumphant attitude, raised their clenched fists to the sky. Most of them declared themselves opposed to sending weapons, crying out for "peace".
But to stand as generic defenders of peace means in fact maintaining a position of equidistance between the West and the Kremlin, not taking sides with the attacked is equivalent to legitimizing the aggressor. Those who shoot civilians, those who do not respect the "humanitarian corridors", those who bomb indiscriminately on women, men and children cannot and must not be left even a shred of legitimacy.
On the contrary, political, economic and above all military support are due responses. The West, in order to have a chance of victory, must assume a position of strong deterrence. If Putin is carrying out a muscle test with his "special operation", we should respond firmly. Show us militarily ready and raise the level of defense.
The decision to send armaments to Kiev does not make us co-responsible for the massacre of Ukrainian citizens, as many would have us believe. On the contrary, by choosing not to support the Ukrainian resistance, these accusations would inexorably fall on our heads. We would be responsible for a cowardly abandonment of the Ukrainian population, who in the vast majority are asking to emancipate themselves from the yoke of Moscow.
Europe must continue to fight for a compromise, but to achieve a decent negotiation result for the Ukrainian people, it is necessary to dialogue with the Kremlin from a position of strength. Showing disunity, fragile and militarily unprepared would have the opposite effect: the unconditional surrender of Ukraine.
Time is not on our side. By now we find ourselves bogged down in the next phase of the invasion. We are witnessing a war that has its origins in 2004, with the famous Orange Revolution, but which materialized in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea and the consequent destabilization of the Donbass. A low-intensity, perpetual war that saw thousands of Ukrainian civilians die and favored the separation of the two republics of Donetsk and Lugansk from Kiev. A war only recently fomented by the premeditated deployment of Russian soldiers on the border and ultimately resulted in the brutal invasion of the whole of Ukraine. The choice, for this time, will be between dishonor and resistance, even armed. We choose carefully. At stake, in addition to the principles of freedom and sovereignty, are Ukrainian citizens, families, children, an entire generation. An entire country.
The post For the West, the choice is between Ukrainian resistance and dishonor appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL https://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/per-loccidente-la-scelta-e-tra-resistenza-ucraina-e-disonore/ on Mon, 14 Mar 2022 03:48:00 +0000.