Ukraine Crisis Exposes Different Agenda in U.S.

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright February 10, 2015
All Rights Reserved.

                Showing colliding interests between the U.S. and Europe, the Ukraine crisis reveals competing interests in a post-Cold War world where the U.S. still expects to command clout from its victory in WWII.  Coming off massive losses in WWII, some ranging as high as 20 million, the Soviet Union endured a heavy toll in eventually defeating Nazi Germany’s Third Reich.  Today’s Germans led by 60-year-old German Chancellor Angela Merkel bear a heavy burden, knowing the devastating toll on Russia, some estimate range in the $3-4 trillion range.  Only recently Russian lawmaker Mikhail Degtyarov, a member of the Supreme Council of the Liberal Democratic Party, estimated Soviet losses in WWII at $4 trillion.  While the U.S. also paid a heavy price defeating Adolf Hitler in WWII, Germany. has a very different historic relationship to Russia, prompting Merkel to take a balanced view.

             Given German atrocities on Russia in WWII, Merkel can’t simply follow the U.S. Cold War prescription of competing against Russia for world domination.  Russian President Vladimir Putin, a former KGB colonel, comes out of the old Soviet school, where Russia sees itself as under constant siege.  Meeting at a security conference in Munich Feb. 8, Merkel made it clear she doesn’t see how arming Ukraine would settle the crisis between pro-Russian separatists and Ukaine.  When Merkel and French President Francois Hollande met with Putin Feb. 7 for six hours in Moscow, they agreed to restart talks in Minsk, Belarus, where Ukraine and Russia agreed to a peace plan Sept. 5, 2014 for resolving the civil war.  Pro-Russian separatists led by Alexander Zakharchenko, backed by Moscow, agreed to a plan to resolve a territorial dispute where Donbass seeks autonomy from the Kiev’s government.

             U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), now chairman of the Armed Services Committee with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) disagreed sharply with Merkel over the best way to deal with Putin.  Conservatives on Capitol Hill, including Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), see Putin pulling the same maneuver as Hitler in the 1930s.  Too close to problem, Merkel seeks a short-term fix to best assure the EU’s recovery from a stubborn recession.  “I understand the debate but I believe that more weapons will not lead to progress Ukraine needs,” pressing for a diplomatic solution.  Against a superior land army, Merkel believes that whatever arms Ukraine gets, they’re still no match for Russia.  It’s ironic that Merkel now gives the same argument Hitler gave to Europe in the 1930s.  McCain and Graham recall the last Munich peace accord Sept. 29, 1938.

             Meeting with representative from France, Britain, Italy, Czechoslovakia and Hitler’s Third Reich in Munich, European powers practically stood on their heads to appease Hitler, essentially ceding Czechoslovakia to Germany in the 1938 Munich agreement.  Merkel sees no parallel to last weekend’s Munich security conference, exposing differences with the U.S.  U.S. historians see the 1938 Munich agreement as the beginning of WWII, eventually dragging the U.S. into a bloody war in Europe.  “At the end of the day, to our European friends, this is not working,” said Graham.  “You can go to Moscow until you’re turn blue in the face.  Stand up to what is clearly a lie and a danger,” said Graham, confronting Merkel’s pacifism, the same kind that led to Hitler’s rise to power in Germany before WWII.  McCain and Graham throw a monkey wrench into Obama’s plans to go along with Merkel.

             President Barack Obama, in a joint press conference today with Merkel in Munich, walked a tightrope accepting the next round of peace talks with Putin in Belarus, while seeking to ratchet up the pressure on Moscow.  “We are in absolute agreement that the 21st century cannot have us stand idle and simply allow the borders of Europe redrawn with the barrel of a gun,” said Barack, exposing the rift with the EU.  Speaking for the EU, Merkel and Hollande spent six hours in Moscow placating Putin, essentially redrawing Ukraine’s borders.  Putin no longer accepts Ukraine’s old borders before a pro-Western coup Feb. 22, 2014 drove out Russian-backed Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich from Kiev.  While not admitting it, Merkel and Holland agreed to redraw Ukraine’s borders that no longer include Crimea and the Donbass region of industrialized Southeastern Ukraine.

             Whatever economic challenges face the EU, Merkel and Hollande should look beyond their own self-interests before redrawing Ukraine’s borders to appease Putin.  What’s even more ironic is that Ukraine wants to join the EU and NATO when they both seek economic stability over possible military confrontation.  Selling out Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, the EU doesn’t want to be dragged down by Ukraine.  Regardless of what goes down in the EU, the U.S. must carefully calculate the best path forward to avoid another a larger problem down the road.  Since the end of WWII, the U.S. directed post-war reconstruction but, most importantly, the blueprint for a lasting peace. Obama and Congressional Republicans need to figure out whether the EU’s current peace formula repeats the same past mistakes that led to WWII, trying to figure out Putin’s real hidden agenda.

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.


Home || Articles || Books || The Teflon Report || Reactions || About Discobolos

This site designed, developed and hosted by the experts at

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.