Président Volodymyr Zelensky
Vladimir Putin is feared for his unpredictable reactions as Russia possesses nuclear weapons and threatens to use them to prevent free countries from providing aid to Ukraine that he is martyrizing.
Should we be careful, strategic, cunning? Absolutely. Should we give in to him? No. Not an inch. We must treat him like the dangerous terrorist that he is. We must surround him, including with the most powerful weapons, and undermine him by all means.
Should we support Ukraine? The "yes" of the international community exceeds the wildest expectations. Never before seen. The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire and Russia's withdrawal from the territory of this democracy. It was adopted by 141 countries. Thirty-five countries abstained; some others were absent. Only five countries voted against the resolution: Russia and Belarus, of course, along with the infamous North Korea, Syria and Eritrea. It is understandable that the abstentions indicate significant reservations about Vladimir Putin's behaviour.
President Putin has never been as weak and isolated as he is now. Yes, we must move forward to help Ukraine. But how? A brief historical reminder will be most helpful here. At the beginning of the Second World War, Nazi Germany bombed England, in particular its capital, the city of London, regardless of civilian deaths.
This powerful country, still at the head of a huge empire, had neglected to sufficiently arm itself despite the obvious rise of Nazism. The English did not lack courage. The English finally chose Winston Churchill to lead the country in these painful times. He vowed to fight everywhere and never surrender. "We will never surrender." He declared in a famous speech in the House of Commons.
But England was running out of weapons. So, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose citizens refused to enter the war on England's side, proposed the lend-lease system. The U.S. would lend money to the British, who would be able to buy all the weapons they needed. This trick saved England. We know what happened next.
This is the situation of Ukraine today. It fights bravely, but lacks weapons. The world must grant a large-scale loan. I suggest $300 billion, a paltry sum for free countries, compared to what a war against Russia would cost.
Such an amount would send a clear message to Putin: Ukraine will have the means to fight. It will finally be able to get the weapons it needs to resist and not collapse. Ukraine could buy fighter planes to protect its airspace; all it takes is one night to paint them in Ukraine's own name. As for pilots, should there be a shortage of them, qualified volunteers from all over the world would certainly be ready to join.
Vladimir Putin has just promised immediate and total war to any country allowing "Ukrainian" planes to take off from their territory to defend Ukrainian airspace. As Ukraine buys aircraft carriers with lend-lease money, and proceeds to take off from international waters. On whom then, will Putin declare war?
That Ukraine shoots down Russian planes will shock Vladimir Putin. Is it dangerous, people will ask? Of course, but there is no better solution than to take such a risk. A country under military attack has the right to defend itself.
The same would be true for tanks, anti-aircraft missiles and the whole panoply of defence means existing on this planet. Vladimir Putin will only back down if the force he is opposed to is as strong as his own. Those who are surprised by the increase in Russian bombings, even on civilian populations, must understand this: the tyrant risks losing his power if he does not succeed in bringing Ukraine down as promised.
And if Ukraine gives in, would that satisfy the tyrant? Not at all. He has already announced his next targets, the Baltic states. And after the Baltic countries, Poland, then Hungary and the others that broke away from the Russian empire when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Until we stop him, as the West stopped Hitler in 1945. This madness will only stop with the end of Vladimir Putin. The sooner the better.
And yet the free countries must not attack Russia. The Russian people are not the enemy.
Russia is not the enemy. On the contrary. It can become a friend like post-war Germany became a friend of the West, like the countries of the former Soviet Union became friends of freedom. It should be made clear to the Russians that they will be welcome in NATO as soon as they meet the membership requirements.
Is there any reason for optimism? Yes. Why is this so? Because, unlike the Cold War between 1945 and 1991, the two sides are no longer at odds over the essential element of that era: the political system. The Soviet Union then advocated extending the communist system and the dictatorship of the proletariat to the whole world. The communists believed that the capitalists would never stop exploiting the workers and that the solution was the abolition of private property; all means of production had to become state property, including agriculture. Stalin starved to death millions of Ukrainians who opposed state control of land in the early 1930s. It was an economic disaster. The Communists had not given up on the idea of state ownership of land. Stalin starved millions of Ukrainians to death who opposed state control of land in the early 1930s.
It was an economic disaster. The Communists did not anticipate the life-threatening danger that the bureaucracy would bring to their rigid, centralized system. Not only did they deprive their citizens of the most basic freedoms, they also languished in poverty.
On the other hand, innovative politicians on the capitalist side managed to curb some of the indecent greed of the rich and to impose a certain sharing of wealth. Although imperfect, this system made the poor less poor than in the communist countries, and a large middle class developed. Moreover, they were able to benefit from the incredible innovations commercialized by brilliant entrepreneurs.
So, what does Vladimir Putin's dream of recreating a Greater Russia mean? Let's imagine that an English Prime Minister seized absolute power in his country and finally took over all the powers, controlling in particular the freedom of speech and of the press and setting as his life's goal to rebuild the British Empire. This empire, at its peak in the early 20th century, has now mushroomed into more than 50 countries. And of course, no one in Britain is thinking of rebuilding it. Anyone who would make such a political program would be ridiculed and, should he try to use violence to do so, would be arrested, put in a straitjacket and committed to a psychiatric hospital.
So why does Vladimir Putin think it is a good program to rebuild the Russian empire against the wishes of the countries that left it?
Yet he is getting support from major fund providers to try to carry out this nonsense. They are called oligarchs. They worship Putin, who allows them to steal the country's great natural resources with the blessing of the state, without the risk of going to jail, while he keeps his people in line with truncheons.
Will we avoid war? Not if Putin remains in office in Russia. We have to prepare for it as best we can. Let's be clear, there is no question of declaring war on Russia. But there is a risk that Putin will declare war on his true or imaginary enemies.
Would eternal glory be his greatest motivation? So why not offer him an honourable and prestigious surrender. We could promise to send him to prison on the island of St. Helena, in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, where two centuries ago Napoleon Bonaparte died surrounded by 2,000 British soldiers. Of course, the number of soldiers watching over him would have to exceed that of Napoleon, in order to demonstrate his superiority over his prestigious predecessor. He could also be surrounded by a team in charge of writing his immortal memoirs in order to finally spread the truth scorned by his opponents.
And to contribute to his mental well-being, he might be allowed to receive extended visits from hand-picked famous visitors. I am thinking especially of one of his great admirers who considers him a genius. And who also considers himself a genius: the former American president Donald Trump. A summit meeting on the island of St. Helena between these two geniuses would make history and confirm Vladimir Putin's right to have destroyed the lives of millions of human beings during his brief time on earth.
Of course, there would be one big precaution to take before authorizing this very special visit: make sure that the island can support the imposing weight of these two geniuses... We already know that it can support one, since Napoleon spent the last five years of his life there; but two?
We should not take the risk that, under this awesome burden, the island would sink into the cold and deep abyss of the Atlantic Ocean, carrying with it the greatest human beings of the 21st century.
Prochaine lettre: Responding to nuclear terrorism!
Comments