Skip to main content

Ukraine crisis trapped in history?

Talks between the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, and the Russian Foreign Secretary, Sergei Lavrov, have failed to 'break the deadlock' on the Ukraine crisis. This is no surprise. Once again the main players are trapped by historical precedent. 

Russia has a genuine interest in the Ukraine, but to say that all sounds like Hitler's claims to the Sudetenland. Yet, if there is to be a diplomatic resolution to the crises there is not doubt that Russia's concerns will have to be - dare I say it? Appeased. 

It serves little purpose declaring the referendum in the Crimea unconstitutional. It begs the question of which constitution has legitimacy, and in the end the US and the EU will have to accept it. The Russians are not going to give way on it no matter what 'the costs', to use the phrase of the US and the EU. 'The costs' are rarely spelled out. It is a vague threat and has little substance to it. 

And so the tension increases with the possibility that Russia may move to 'protect' Russian speakers in East Ukraine. 

If there is to be a diplomatic solution, then let it not be hidebound by historical analogies. Given that a diplomatic solution is the only real alternative to conflict then this may be a time when 'appeasement' works!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba
7 comments
Read more

The unethical language of 'welfare dependency'

It is unethical to stigmatise people without foundation. Creating a stereotype, a generalised brand, in order to  demonize a group regardless of the individual and without regard for the potential harm it may do is unfair and prejudicial. It is one reason, and a major one, why racism is unethical; it fails to give a fair consideration of interest to a group of people simply because they are branded in this way. They are not worthy of equal consideration because they are different.  It seeks also to influence the attitudes of others to those stereotyped. If I said 'the Irish are lazy'; you would rightly respond that this is a ridiculous and unfounded stereotype. It brands all Irish on the basis of a prejudice. It is harmful certainly; but it is worse if I intend it to be harmful. If I intend to influence the attitude of others. And so it is with 'the unemployed'. All I need do is substitute 'work-shy' and use it in an injudicious way; to imply that it applies to
2 comments
Read more

The Thin End account of COVID Lockdown

Post a Comment
Read more