The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}


A 19th-century Mexican president once summarized his country's plight: "So far from God, so close to the United States." Ukraine has the same problem, but with Russia. And its geographic proximity is particularly worrisome right now.

President Vladimir Putin, who annexed Crimea from Ukraine in a 2014 invasion, has raised fears he is planning another attack. He has massed troops near the border of the former Soviet republic, demanding that NATO renounce the possibility of Ukraine ever joining the alliance or providing bases for its forces.

The U.S. foreign policy establishment and its allies in Congress have taken this opportunity to remind us that they have no new ideas and that all their old ones are bad. They claim that American credibility is on the line and warn the Biden administration not to show insufficient resolve.

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) said any accommodation on our part would "embolden Vladimir Putin and his fellow autocrats by demonstrating the United States will surrender in the face of saber-rattling." Retired Adm. James Stavridis, a former commander of NATO forces, declared, "Appeasement does not work any better now than it worked for Neville Chamberlain in the late 1930s."

There are a couple of flaws in their reasoning. The first is the gap between their fierce rhetoric and their mild remedies. Even McCaul and Stavridis don't think the U.S. should go to war if Russia invades Ukraine. Our support for Ukraine does not extend to putting our troops in harm's way. In case of a Russian invasion, whatever we might do to help Ukraine or punish Russia will not make much difference.

The second is that credibility is a false idol. President Joe Biden's critics accuse him of damaging ours with his chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan. If Biden doesn't respond appropriately on Ukraine, they insist, China will assume it can swallow up Taiwan without paying a price.

But just because the U.S. leaves one conflict or avoids another doesn't mean it will follow the same course in another place or at another time. Bill Clinton pulled out of Somalia but intervened in Bosnia.

George W. Bush was forced to issue a meek apology to China in 2001 after an American military plane collided with a Chinese fighter and crash-landed on a Chinese island, where its crew was held hostage. But that didn't stop him from invading Afghanistan or Iraq.

As for "appeasement," diplomacy requires compromise, and not every compromise is the moral equivalent of surrender. When Ronald Reagan signed a 1987 treaty banning intermediate-range nuclear missiles from Europe, angry conservatives compared him to ... Neville Chamberlain. Two years later, though, the Berlin Wall came down.

Putin's posture is hardly evidence of Hitler-like ambitions. Suppose that Mexico were to enter an alliance that put Russian or Chinese troops on its soil to deter U.S. bullying. We would never tolerate it, any more than President John F. Kennedy was willing to tolerate Soviet missiles in Cuba.

The Russian president has indicated that, in parallel fashion, he is not willing to tolerate NATO troops, tanks, missiles and warplanes in Ukraine. The Kremlin is following "the NUPIMBY principle — No Unfriendly Powers in My Backyard," says Stephen Van Evera, an international relations scholar at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "States almost universally resist the close approach of hostile powers and alliances toward their borders."

Michael McFaul, a former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, scoffed at such concerns, tweeting: "NATO has never and will never attack Russia." But in a dangerous world, nations can't count on the benign intentions of other nations — not in the short term, and certainly not in the long term. What counts is capabilities.

In this crisis, the U.S. wants to ensure the security and independence of Ukraine. Russia wants to eliminate the prospect of another NATO ally on its border. Fortunately, there is a solution that achieves both objectives without war: an agreement that Ukraine will be a neutral country, in exchange for Russia's commitment to back off and leave Ukraine in peace.

There is a good precedent for this solution. In 1955, Austria had to commit itself to neutrality in the Cold War to get the Soviets to end their military occupation of one zone of the country. As a result, wrote historian Tony Judt, Austria soon emerged as "a model Alpine democracy: neutral, prosperous and stable."

Ukraine has not been so lucky. But with a recognition of reality and some creative statesmanship, it could be.

Follow Steve Chapman on Twitter @SteveChapman13 or at To find out more about Steve Chapman and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

By Trevor Hunnicutt and Andrea Shalal

WASHINGTON/REHOBOTH BEACH, Del. (Reuters) -U.S. President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin will speak on Thursday, the White House said, as Washington crafts a common response to Russia's military build-up on the Ukraine border with European allies.

The two leaders will discuss a range of topics, including upcoming security talks between the countries and a tense situation in Europe, White House National Security Council spokesperson Emily Horne said in a statement.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Reuters the call was planned for "late Thursday evening," without elaborating.

Horne said Biden had spoken with leaders across Europe about the situation on the Ukraine border, while Biden administration officials were in touch with NATO, the European Union and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Moscow has alarmed the West by massing tens of thousands of troops near Ukraine in the past two months, following its seizure of Ukraine's Crimea peninsula in 2014 and its backing of separatists fighting Kyiv troops in eastern Ukraine.

Russia denies planning to attack Ukraine and says it has the right to move its troops on its own soil as it likes.

Moscow, worried by what it says is the West's re-arming of Ukraine, has said it wants legally-binding guarantees NATO will not expand further eastwards, and that certain offensive weapons will not be deployed to Ukraine or other neighboring countries.

U.S. concerns have not ebbed in recent weeks, according to a senior Biden administration official. Other U.S. officials said that despite a report over the weekend that Russia would be pulling back about 10,000 troops from its border with Ukraine, they had seen little evidence to support that so far.

"We are at a moment of crisis and have been for some weeks now given the Russian build-up, and it will take a high level of engagement to address this and to find a path of de-escalation," said one of the officials, who declined to be named.

That person said Putin requested the call with Biden.

"When President Biden has asked to speak with President Putin over the course of 2021, President Putin has said, Yes, let's talk. And when President Putin says, I'm interested in touching base and having a phone call, President Biden says yes."

Biden is likely to reiterate during the call that the United States will take swift economic action against Russia in the case of an invasion. They will also reinforce the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in such a case.

But the U.S. president has been pushing direct diplomacy as an alternative.

The Biden administration has been in deep talks with Ukraine as well as a host of NATO allies, including those bordering Russia, according to Horne, the White House spokesperson.

Biden will likely speak with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy soon, another official said. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke with the Ukrainian leader on Wednesday and expressed "unwavering support for Ukraine's independence," according to a spokesperson.

JSTARS, a type of U.S. military spy plane, operated in Ukrainian airspace for the first time earlier this week, though different types of surveillance aircraft are common in the region, officials said.

Biden on Tuesday said "we'll see" when asked if he would meet Putin on Jan. 10, the same day U.S. and Russian officials are due to hold security talks. But Biden is not expected to attend those talks or meet with Putin that day, an official said.

Russia and NATO are also set to hold talks on Jan. 12, with a broader meeting including Moscow, Washington and other European countries slated for Jan. 13.

Putin has compared to the current tensions to the Cold War-era Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Washington regards some of his demands, including restrictions on NATO expansion, as non-starters.

Conversations between Putin and Biden are likely to touch on other issues, too, including the ongoing talks with Iran over its nuclear program, a U.S. official said.

(Additional reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin in Moscow, Susan Heavey and Idrees Ali in Washington; Editing by Chris Gallagher and Alistair Bell)