These are the biggest misconceptions about the war in Ukraine

Rarely in history has the evil shown itself as clearly as in the attack on Ukraine a year ago. Russia’s war against its peaceful neighbors is baseless and inhumane. Wladimir is the justification of Vladimir Putin (70) with which he claims hundreds of thousands of painful deaths.

But no matter how clear the case may be, truth twisters are gaining support in discussions about the war – also here in Switzerland. Your statements throw a spanner in the works of international support for Ukraine, without which Putin could have realized his brutal visions long ago.

The five biggest mistakes – and why they are so dangerous:

Why would she? Hardly any war ends in negotiations. Imagine if the Allies had entered into negotiations with Nazi Germany (a hope the Nazi elites had) in 1944, instead of forcing Hitler’s henchmen into unconditional surrender. Europe would be different today, a lot worse. Negotiations only make sense if at least one of the belligerents has exhausted all military options. Until then, Ukraine has every right to improve its position through military victories over the Russians.

Virtually every Western country – except Switzerland – has supplied arms to Ukraine since the outbreak of war. Without these steel supplies, Ukraine would never have been able to contain the militarily superior adversary for so long, let alone regain lost territories. If this military support dries up, Putin will take over the country in no time. The massacres at Bucha, Irpin and Izjum show the human suffering his troops are willing to inflict on defenseless civilians. Those who want to prevent human suffering must help Ukraine defeat the inhuman attacker.

No they do not. Already in 1954, Nikita Khrushchev (1894–1971) had incorporated the peninsula with its warlike history into the Ukrainian Socialist Republic. In the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, the Russians once again recognized the “territorial integrity” and the “inviolability of borders” of Ukraine, including Crimea and Donbass. The referendum held by the Russians after the illegal occupation of Crimea in 2014 is just as undemocratic and worthless as the referendums held in 2022 in Donbass. If Ukraine relinquishes Crimea or Donbass, it would be a dangerous concession to Moscow. Putin would be rewarded for his war of aggression. The Russian hunger for new territories would hardly be satisfied.

Justifying the aggressive behavior of one actor with the aggressive behavior of another actor is not very effective. The English language has the term “Whataboutism”: Always respond to all criticism with “And what about X and Y?” reacting does not advance the world. Apart from the fact that the territorial attack by a nuclear power on a peaceful neighbor in the heart of Europe is a crime that was unthinkable until recently, and by all available standards far worse than that committed by the Americans. And something we should not forget: after the Second World War, it was again the Americans who saved our continent from the abyss of tyranny.

Each country has the right to freely decide on its alliance membership. Also Ukraine. Moscow promised this to Kiev in the 1994 Budapest Accords. In return, Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal (it was the third largest nuclear power in the world until the mid-1990s). The fact that the pseudo-tsar in the Kremlin wants to dictate to his neighbors who they can work with is because of his dangerous delusions of superpower. Imagine if the Egyptians, Greeks or Romans wanted to impose such rules on the former provinces of their faded great empires. Europe would degenerate into an eternal battlefield.

The Russian war against Ukraine remains crystal clear. Those who cloud the debate with the wrong arguments are complicit in one of the greatest crimes in European history.

Source: Blick