I am not a Marine Le Pen supporter, but I do want to end the violence in Ukraine. A vote for Le Pen in the upcoming election is a vote for peace.
Emmanuel Macron has been instrumental is shaping the NATO policy of arming Ukraine with lethal weapons and imposing unprecedented economic sanctions, attempting to make the costs of war so high that President Putin yields. But it also might just prolong the conflict, extending the pain and suffering of the Ukrainian people for years, as such proxy wars have done elsewhere. Take Syria as an example, Russian-backed pro-government forces have battled U.S.-supported opposition militias for over a decade – resulting in an estimated 115,000 civilian deaths.
Devenez « lecteur premium », pour avoir accès à une navigation sans publicité, et nous soutenir financièrement pour continuer de défendre vos idées !
En tant que lecteur premium, vous pouvez également participer à la discussion et publier des commentaires.
Le Pen offers a different path where France can shape a compromise on NATO membership invitations. Noted Oxford historian Robert Service was interviewed recently and pointed to an agreement between the U.S. and Ukraine in November 2021 as the catalyst for the current crisis. In the Charter on Strategic Partnership, Dr. Service explained that the U.S. formally asserted support for Ukrainian NATO membership. Just one month later, in a letter to the U.S. and its allies, Russia demanded that they unwind that agreement and guarantee in writing that Ukraine be barred from joining NATO.
Russia’s response insisted that any further eastward encroachment of NATO towards Russia would disrupt the detente that has existed in Europe since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. When the Berlin Wall came down in 1989, the Warsaw Pact alliance (of U.S.S.R. and Eastern European nations) soon crumbled and the rough parity that had existed between them and NATO suddenly vanished, leaving NATO standing alone. Putin’s grievances derive from a fundamental asymmetry between NATO and Russia and future expansions of NATO further eastward would certainly exacerbate that imbalance.
The U.S.’s written response to Russia’s letter was leaked and lays out a detailed response to the Russian demand. The letter asserts that “all states respecting the right of other states to choose or change security arrangements, and to decide their own future and foreign policy free from outside interference. In this light, we reaffirm our commitment to NATO’s Open Door Policy under Article 10 of the Washington Treaty ». In a perfect world, all states ought to have the right to make those decisions but in choosing between the current tragedy in Ukraine and the right to “change security arrangements” I find that argument unconvincing.
Additionally, the reference to Article 10 of NATO’s original 1949 treaty misses the mark. Article 10 provides that NATO members, may “by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State” to become a member of the alliance. The treaty offers no right-to-apply for Ukraine or any other European country. The U.S. letter to Russia referred to an Open Door policy to NATO membership, but that in itself is a flawed interpretation of Article 10 and is partially responsible for the swirl of factors contributing to today’s war.
A victory for Le Pen would give her the authority to write a letter to Putin that explicitly guarantees that NATO would not invite Ukraine to join the alliance. Such a move in no way violates either the spirit or the intent of Article 10. In fact, the wording of Article 10 hands a new membership veto power to all 30 NATO members – any one of them could write such a letter and end the war today.
Today’s commentators express concern for another Cold War. However terrifying that period was, the fact that each side was matched rather equally meant that neither was willing to face the prospects for war and the ensuing mutually assured destruction. Today we face an uneven scenario where NATO is substantially stronger than Russia and its continued growth and expansion can be seen as a threat. While its public stance is to promote peace, NATO member countries’ military presence in Europe is enormous, with a large cache of nuclear weapons pointed east. Putin’s response when cornered is hard to estimate and could end in a broader war.
France can address NATO’s threat to Russia and the ongoing war fighting in Ukraine today through de-escalation, instead of the economic and proxy war that Macron and others threaten. Electing Le Pen means hope for reaching a compromise with Russia and restricting the ability of Ukraine to join NATO would end today’s violence and prevent us all from sinking into a larger, avoidable conflict.
Justin B. Hollander
Justin B. Hollander is a professor at Tufts University where he teaches public policy and planning. Twitter @JustinHollander.
Abonnez-vous sans tarder à notre chaîne Telegram, pour le cas où Dreuz soit censuré, ou son accès coupé. Cliquez ici : Dreuz.Info.Telegram.
Yes ! … chicane ! … oups ! … m’sorry ! … she can !
😂
it’s no excuse for invading ukraine !
Yes, Yes ,Yes naomie: You are absolutely right.
But — there is a but — Putin in my view had no choice: Ukraine, after bombing the Russian-speaking eastern part of the country for years and killing thousands and thousands, was ready to pounce on separatist East Ukraine and finish it off: So Putin chose to strike first: It was a mistake, (OK : Putin is BAD, ok ! )
The part I like best in prof: Hollander’s article is : » Today we face an uneven scenario where NATO is substantially stronger than Russia, and its CONTINUED EXPANSION is seen as a THREAT ».
« the flood of strident anti-Russian and pro-Ukraine aricles on Dreuz and the totality of Western media ( in my modest opinion). »
Perhaps because Ukraine is part of us now ? The « Western World » ? Tell me, just like that, why are the Ukrainians fighting ? What do they really want ?
—
« Ukraine, after bombing the Russian-speaking eastern part of the country for years and killing thousands and thousands, was ready to pounce on separatist East Ukraine and finish it off »
Factually wrong. The sedition of the rebellious regions was prepared and supported by the Russian armed forces. It is an undisputed fact. Russian interference in Ukrainian internal affairs is also an indisputable fact.
—
« …was ready to pounce on separatist East Ukraine and finish it off »
An enormity ! What are your sources ? The fact is that Ukraine simply had no military means to launch this kind of hostilities knowing that Russia could not remain inactive.
I hear you koziolek, and I know many, many people think likewise.
But it’s not that simple. The Ukraine we know now is a recent construction invenyed by the USSR. It bunched together many old provinces with little in common: in the West, a patchwork of communities of Hungarian, Polish,German, Rumanian and even Tzigane people. The majority of these people were catholics and more western-thinking than in the eastern part.These people are geographically and mentally close to the rest of Western Europe.
In the East, just the opposite: several provinces ethnically uniform; Russian speaking and of the Christian Orthodox faith: These communities, long part of Russia proper, feel still today that they are Russian,period.
In the past, the whole thing held together under the iron hand of the Communists. When the Soviet empire fell, things deteriorated slowly. After the Maidan Revolution in2014 and the Coup d’Etat that followed, the Western Ukrainians gained the upper hand.the Russian speaking easterners started being discriminated and oppressed : interdiction of speaking russian and muuch more. Armed rebellion began. Followed by heavy repression: civilian bombings by artillery, etc…..You see Koziolek, it’s not that simple…
On the international side things got bad as well. At the fall of the Soviet Empire, there was an agreement between Yeltsin and the Americans: NATO , supposed to be a « defensive » alliance against the Soviet bloc, would not try to take steps towards Russia, now considered non-aggressive. But in the following years, NATO, always inching Eastwards,got 14 newEastern European countries under its umbrella; 14 NEW COUNTRIES CLOSE TO RUSSIA WITH AMERICAN MISSILES AIMED TOWARDS …..TOWARDS WHAT? kOZIOLEK
If we lived in a perfect world, if NATO/USA were not so pushy towards Russia, if Ukraine was a nice happy, homogenous democratic country instead of a CIA heaven with totally corrupt government with a pressident who plays piano with his penis on television, if Kiiew had not as a mayor the former commander-in-second pof the Azow bataillon, etc,etc, you would be right Koziolek. But things are not that simple, or all black and white ….
This being said, Pution was WRONG to invade Ukraine.
What started the latest crisis is the announcement by Kiev that Ukraine wanted to join NATO.
A final thought for you, Koziolek: what would Washington’s reaction be if Russia, after a treaty with Mexico, installed batteries of missiles along the southern bank of the Rio Grande?
Thank you for your effort. Unfortunately I cannot join your point of view for a very simple reason. Sometimes the truth is glaring. Despite the differences you point out, Ukraine is determined to adhere to our way of life. Poutun wants to oppose it. Why ? No idea except the one you lift from a beleaguered citadel. Paranoid as hell. By what right ? Here the answer is clear. No right at all.
I know and I admit that my condition as a border Polak affects my personal commitment to the Ukrainian cause. But I firmly believe that Ukraine will eventually join us. Because not only does she want it but above all because to join us she bleeds. And she’s bleeding profusely right now.
By the way
« …prohibition of speaking russian… »
Completely wrong. There was never any question of prohibiting speaking Russian in the public space. What is this madness ? The law in question made Ukrainian the only official language. In administration and in education. Clumsy ? OK ! Criminal ? Well then !
—
« A final thought for you, Koziolek: what would Washington’s reaction be if Russia, after a treaty with Mexico, installed batteries of missiles along the southern bank of the Rio Grande? »
You know.. the United States has already let Castro’s Cuba prosper a stone’s throw from Miami. And besides, the question does not arise. The Mexicans still haven’t gone mad. The example of Cuba has vaccinated them. I think. Let’s beware of false equivalences.
mister koziolek !!!
is not true thats your wrote than ukraine is part of us « »all is wrong « » because all ukrainia make part of great russia » and its communist as lenin , kroutchev make all for dismantle that and separate ukrainia from ussr because they were born in this part of ussr « UKRAINIA « » because same staline make pays this separate countrys of ussr in making a great famine whether 4 mions of soviets « »ukrainiaans » are dead of famine and thats has been organized by dictator georgian of tbilissi « STALINE « » and look this countrys of ex ussr « » georgia » wanted entry into bladdy europa union then they are situed on asia more or less » and personnally i am for destruction of this europa union » because she is too much forcing israel to concessions for created a arabic palestinian countrys that will put end to eretz israel « palestine is israel and israel is palestine » and this bladdy europa union is too much employed a policys anti israeli and rather pro palestinian state « »THEN THIS STATE WILL BE A STATE OF TERROR « » when you knows than this europa union is sending bions of euros to zone C of judea samaria (then is forbidden for arabic palestinians to constructed illegally house there and europa union is sending financing aids to ngo leftits israelis in a goal to destabilized « »israel « » and if in israel will have a pm hawkish , hard liner pushing a policys off greater israel « » will response to europa union thats ALL YOU MONEYS THAT YOU WILL SENT TO ARABIC PALESTINIAN POPULATION WILL BE WILL BE TAKING FOR JEWISH POPULATION OF JUDEA SAMARIA « »and israel henceforth will forbidden all moneys from europa union will be taked for the c/o of jewish people of giborim gedolim of judea samaria « » STOP THAN EUROPA UNION IS SUPPORTING A PALESTINIAN STATE THEN THIS PALESTINIAN STATE WILL BE A TERROR STATE THAN NEVER ISRAEL WILL DO AGAINST … » » !!
YES I AM FOR IMPLOSION OF THIS EUROPA UNION BECAUSE SHE IS TOO MUCH LINKED TO USA ..NATO AND ITS UNORMAL THAN USSR IS OVER IN 1990 THEN THIS NATO IS CONTINUING ..STOP NATO SHOULD STOP TO INVOLVED WITH LINKS TO EUROPA UNION …THAN MANY POPULATION WANT END OF THATS §§§
i want said to these bastards of americans wanted to involved with europa union with dictator of turkey erdogan and i want said to usa plse wipe out your nato and will be better than usa is involved into usa « »
i am supporter of greater israel « » and that israel will detached of all aids of usa for not undergo « »diktats of bladdy usa « »!!
This Justin Hollander sounds like a sensible person:
I agree with you ! Thank you for your courage !!!
I WILL VOTE FOR MARINE LE PEN FOR STOPS END HEGEMONY OF GERMANY REVENGE THATS ALL BECAUSE GERMANY BECOMES DANGEROUS I THINK ….NORMALLY AFTER CAPITULATION OF GERMANY HITLERIAN IN MAY 1945 …GERMANY DONT HAVE RIGHT TO HAVE A DEFENSE BUDGET AND SINCE GERMANY IS PART MEMBER OF EUROPA UNION ..FRANCE HAS MADE ALL UNDER UMPS/LREM POLICYS GOVERNMENT MANY CONCESSIONS TO GERMANY ALL POLITICIENS OF FRANCE HAS FORGET THAN GERMANY BECOMES DANGEROUS SHE WANT RISE UP HIS DEFENSE BUDGET TO 100 BIONS OF EUROS …AND NONE OF AMERICANS …ISRAELIS AND EUROPEANS GOVERNEMENT TELLS SOMETHING ABOUT THAT …YES ONE THE POLAND IS SCARED ABOUT RISE UP OF DEFENSE BIDGET OF GERMANY … //ME I ACCUSES THAT GORBATCHEV HAS DISMANTLE USSR AND ITS HIM THE RESPONSABLE OF THIS TERRIBLE DISMANTLED OF USSR FOR GIVES INDEPENDANCE TO UKRAINIA THEN THAN UKRAINIA MAKE PART OF GREAT RUSSIA ..GIVE INDEPENDANCE TO BALTICS COUNTRYS HAS BEEN ANNEXED BY USSR IN MAY 1945 BECAUSE THESE COUNTRYS HAS BEEN COLLABORATED TO HITLER SS REGIME OF GERMANY .. AND WHY CRAZY GORBATCHOV GIVE THE DDR TO CAPITALIST GERMANY THEN THIS DONT MERIT TO HAVE A GIFT FROM PART OF RUSSIA BECAUSE GERMANY HAS BEEN RESPONSIBLE OF 6 MIONS OF JEWS WILDLY ASSASSINATED AND 30 MIONS OF SOVIETS RUSSIANS ..
WAS ERROR OF GORBATCHEV AND THIS MAN SHOULD BE GUILTY TO MAKE DISMANTLE OF USSR INSTEAD TO STAYS GREAT USSR ….§§
FOR SUPPORT RUSSIA AND AGAINST UKRAINIA REGIME I WILL VOTE FOR MARINE LE PEN FOR THAT EUROPA UNION WILL WIPE OUT THATS ALL …..
Le point intéressant de cet article et qui n’a jamais été creusé jusque là sur Dreuz : l’intérêt de l’Ukraine (fort compréhensible) d’entrer dans l’OTAN est-il le nôtre ? On connaît la position de Guy Milliere : un Etat est souverain et décide librement de sa politique extérieure et dès lors que l’OTAN est une organisation defensive sans agressivité vis-à-vis de la Russie, toute réaction hostile de Poutine ne relève que de la paranoïa. Vrai.
Néanmoins, une grande partie de la géopolitique est fondée sur des ressentis qui puisent au fin fond des mémoires collectives nationales et ne sont pas toujours rationnels. Et face à un Etat autoritaire qui a une lecture belliciste des relations diplomatiques, la recherche d’un équilibre (qui doit nous offrir l’avantage mais aussi la paix) requiert des compromis ou l’intérêt du peuple français devrait être la priorité d’un dirigeant…français.
Le problème est que Poutine, sous prétexte que la Russie ne doit pas toucher les frontières de l’Otan, se permet de faire des pays annexes des satellites à sa botte avec des despotes à leur tête.
La bonne méthode serait que les pays frontaliers de la Russie voient leurs frontières garanties par la Russie et l’Otan mais l’Ukraine est l’exemple même de la fragilité de ce type d’accord.
Oui, c’était effectivement ce qui aurait dû occuper les chancelleries ces 20 dernières année. Je ne m’y connais pas assez pour savoir où cela a déraillé, hormis le fait que la dissuasion est le meilleur allié d’un État (et donc l’expression de sa puissance) et que cela ne fait pas partie de l’ADN de l’UE…
J’ai lu quelque part qu’un proverbe de sagesse juive dit : même si tu t’occupes de tes propres affaires, ton ennemi se sent menacé. Ça m’étonnerait que Marine puisse résoudre le problème aussi facilement.
« I am not a Marine Le Pen supporter, »pourquoi avoir besoin de l’écrire, comme si le lecteur était imbécile ou bien que c’était un crime contre l’humanité de l’être?
Yes more support to Ukraine means a longer war and more deaths and the possible prospect of a nuclear and world war. Macron is not a peace worker but is throwing oil on the fire. Biden and Macron are not a chance for the peace.