Ending the War in Ukraine Would Be Hard — but Not Unprecedented

One would think that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is the first time a war had to be brought to a close without one side crushing the other, occupying its capital, and dictating terms.It’s always hard to end a war and to have to cut a deal with persons who attacked you and killed and cruelly treated your troops and citizens. It’s infuriating beyond imagination.Sometimes, though, it’s the only alternative. Or the least bad one.The chance of removing Russia from Crimea ended in 2014 and the chance of removing Russia from all of eastern Ukraine, short of introducing American forces — and maybe thermonuclear war — ended in 2022, in both cases directly after the Russian invasions when the United States did nothing much. An opening to recover some lost territory came nine-months into the war when the Russians were briefly on the run. Team Biden didn’t help the Ukrainians take advantage — instead providing piecemeal assistance and only what Biden officials thought appropriate and non-escalatory. Once the Russians caught their breath and dug in, that window shut. Resolving today’s bloody stalemate may be hard but it’s not unprecedented.Korean War (1950-1953)The president of what became known as South Korea, Syngman Rhee, opposed negotiations, tried to sabotage them, and refused to sign the armistice agreement. Rhee wanted UN forces (aka America) to reunify the peninsula by force. Yet the United States had had enough and wasn’t going to spend the blood to retake the entire peninsula while thrashing the Communist Chinese — who had started it all. It took three years to reach an armistice. And all the while American (and South Korean) troops were dying and its prisoners of war maltreated by communist captors. The Vietnam War (1964-1975)The communists started it and the final deal let them occupy parts of South Vietnam. It took five years to negotiate a settlement — including a couple years arguing over the shape of the negotiating table. American POWs were being abused and troops dying while diplomats were talking. President Nixon forced the South Vietnamese to sign the deal. To lasting shame, the United States did not intervene when the North Vietnamese violated the agreement and launched an offensive in early 1975 — and conquered the South.Rhodesian War (1964-1979) This is little remembered. Britain brokered an agreement in late 1979 whereby the Rhodesian government cut a deal with guerrilla leader Robert Mugabe and ultimately gave him the country. The Rhodesians had little choice. The free world was against them, and was backing Mugabe — both Marxist and brutal. It took five years to come to a deal. Mugabe tormented and looted the country for the next 37 years.President Zelensky ought to thank his lucky stars he might at least get most of what he started with — and an implicit promise of American military support is available via the “mineral agreement.”If Mr. Zelensky and the Europeans want to try and retake the Crimea and all of eastern Ukraine, have at it. Will Britain send all 25 of its serviceable tanks?As for Democratic Party leaders, if the issue is giving Ukraine a formal promise of American security support…fine. Go make that case to the voters, including those whose children serve in the military and will be on the hook. Don’t hold your breath. The Democrats are selectively bloodthirsty. Remember them calling for leaving Iraq no matter what? There was Code Pink and the refrain “Bush lied, people died.”Now they’re all for other people fighting in Ukraine, but refused to send Ukraine lethal aid back in the Obama era when it would have really helped. Only Trump sent them powerful weapons.And the Biden administration strong-armed Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu to declare a cease fire in Gaza despite the Hamas massacre of Israeli citizens on October 7.Inconsistency may be a permanent feature of politics and foreign relations. Yet it seems the Democrats will allow any number of people to die in Ukraine if it might destroy Donald Trump.Xi Jinping must be delighted that the war continues. It distracts America and the West and depletes arsenals while Washington spends billions it doesn’t have. And there’s the political friction inside America and between Washington and its allies. Meanwhile, Russia becomes more dependent on China — not to mention on Beijing’s satrap, North Korea. And the cheap oil keeps on flowing. A win-win for Mr. Xi.So ending wars is tough — as the ancient Greeks could have told us. Can you make Putin regret starting the war, though? That will be hard. And Mr. Trump might need to allow concessions to Russia — to include sanctions relief. Such things are often required when wars end by negotiation — even if you hate the other side. Yet you can still keep certain sanctions in place and collapse the price of oil — a huge source of Russian income — by juicing US energy production. And impose tougher sanctions on China, Iran, and North Korea so at least they’ll regret having helped Russia. And maybe enforce sanctions for once.And enforce the ceasefire terms while also providing long-term economic support to Ukraine and solid military assistance (all of it audited) — so it can defend itself. Not perfect, but better than the alternatives.

Ending the War in Ukraine Would Be Hard — but Not Unprecedented

More from the New York Sun

An American Hostage the Taliban Won’t Admit Exists

American Fentanyl Deaths Are Dropping — But China Holds the Cards

Trump Was Right About Tariffs

Trump Administration Angles for New Strategic Advantage as Qatar Holds Funds for America From Venezuelan Oil Sales

Shadow of Doubt: Punxsutawney Phil’s Name Pops Up in Latest Epstein Document Dump

A ‘Religious Test’ in Minnesota?

Pam Bondi’s Reboot of Weaponization Working Group Signals Pressure From Trump on Prosecutions of Critics Is Reaching Breaking Point

Fulton County To Sue Over Election Raid Involving FBI Agents, Tulsi Gabbard