>on pushing the West, particularly Washington, to enter and engage in serious negotiations, which it has refused to do since before the war.
This overemphasizes the importance of America by half – or, at the very least, it does make an argument as to why it should be US policy to enter into negotiations against the will of the Ukrainians; to hand over territory and people to the Neo-fascist Russian regime and the terror they are and will inflict for generations. The US populace is not suffering mass rapes or war crimes at the hands of the Russians. It is the height of arrogance to think the US or other western counterparts should make that decision. That is the job of the Ukrainians.
If the Ukrainians make asks of the US or other western counterparts as a part of /its/ negotiations the US should give Ukraine what it needs to end the armed conflict. If Ukraine wants to go to the mat to defend their countrymen, who is the US to stop them?
As to the question of whether there has been debate over sending military aid that’s also wrong. There is no debate as to whether we send any weapons whatsoever, sure. The debate has shifted to which weapon systems should be sent and to what end – there still haven’t been any fixed wing aircraft transferred to Ukraine, no long range missiles etc. The debate is being had; you just aren’t participating.
If the desire is to critically interrogate western military aid policy, and to y’know meaningfully contribute to the conversation it’s time to get way into the weeds – which weapon systems should be transferred to Ukraine and which ones should not, and why. The debate over aid writ large has in fact ended – it’s been determined that withholding ALL military aid will unambiguously result in a Russian victory – the end of Ukraine as we know it; the beginnings of living under fascism for tens of millions. Now the question is how to prevent this (subject to the Ukrainians will to do so of course), while minimizing the risks of escalation and other knock on effects. This requires much more detailed specific journalism about the specific weapons provided; about the specific capabilities and tactics and something I find sorely lacking on the left.
>on pushing the West, particularly Washington, to enter and engage in serious negotiations, which it has refused to do since before the war.
This overemphasizes the importance of America by half – or, at the very least, it does make an argument as to why it should be US policy to enter into negotiations against the will of the Ukrainians; to hand over territory and people to the Neo-fascist Russian regime and the terror they are and will inflict for generations. The US populace is not suffering mass rapes or war crimes at the hands of the Russians. It is the height of arrogance to think the US or other western counterparts should make that decision. That is the job of the Ukrainians.
If the Ukrainians make asks of the US or other western counterparts as a part of /its/ negotiations the US should give Ukraine what it needs to end the armed conflict. If Ukraine wants to go to the mat to defend their countrymen, who is the US to stop them?
As to the question of whether there has been debate over sending military aid that’s also wrong. There is no debate as to whether we send any weapons whatsoever, sure. The debate has shifted to which weapon systems should be sent and to what end – there still haven’t been any fixed wing aircraft transferred to Ukraine, no long range missiles etc. The debate is being had; you just aren’t participating.
If the desire is to critically interrogate western military aid policy, and to y’know meaningfully contribute to the conversation it’s time to get way into the weeds – which weapon systems should be transferred to Ukraine and which ones should not, and why. The debate over aid writ large has in fact ended – it’s been determined that withholding ALL military aid will unambiguously result in a Russian victory – the end of Ukraine as we know it; the beginnings of living under fascism for tens of millions. Now the question is how to prevent this (subject to the Ukrainians will to do so of course), while minimizing the risks of escalation and other knock on effects. This requires much more detailed specific journalism about the specific weapons provided; about the specific capabilities and tactics and something I find sorely lacking on the left.