Since the world war over Ukraine began to worsen gravely following the Sept. 8 Ramstein Air Base NATO-plus meeting, the proposals of two strategic writers are posted on the Quincy Institute “Responsible Statecraft” website, proposals that U.S. President Joe Biden start U.S.-Russia negotiations to prevent nuclear war—Anatol Lieven, on Sept. 23, as an urgent demand; and a Sept. 21summary on a Sept. 15 report by Lyle Goldstein, in which he makes a reasoned proposal.
Lieven’s views on Russian and NATO faults, weaknesses and strengths aside, his argument is that once the four oblasts are, as he says “annexed” by Russia, bringing the war to an end will be nearly impossible, and it will keep escalating. Therefore his kicker: “With news of possible annexation and potential use of nuclear weapons, Washington must put on the brakes and press for talks.” Lieven postulated that Russia might not immediately annex after the referenda, and that President Putin might pause once more for a possible opening, which Biden must create. Lieven argued:
“The Biden administration’s position has been that peace negotiations are purely a matter for Ukraine. Together with Russian actions, this stance contributes to making a peace process virtually impossible. It is also both politically and morally wrong. The United States has given military assistance (including intelligence assistance in the killing of Russian commanders) that have made America very nearly a co-belligerent in this war.
“This and U.S.-led sanctions against Russia have caused Americans serious economic loss and involved the United States and its citizens in grave risks. The impact on Washington’s allies in Europe and on the world economy has been even worse, threatening key Western partners with food shortages and internal revolt. In the very worst case, America could face the possibility of annihilation in nuclear war….
“A peace process cannot be initiated unless both sides abandon preconditions for talks that are completely unacceptable to the other side. A good starting point for talks could be the proposals made by the Ukrainian government itself back in March, which met Russian demands on certain key issues including neutrality. The fact that Putin explicitly and favorably cited Ukraine’s peace proposal in his speech announcing Russia’s partial mobilization may offer a glimmer of hope for diplomacy.
“If the Biden administration does not explore this potential chance of peace, the consequences of a continued escalatory spiral could be disastrous for all concerned.” (https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/09/22/tick-tock-putin-escalation-begins-countdown-of-diplomacy-clock/ )
Goldstein, of Brown University’s Watson Institute, Director of Asia Engagement at the Washington think-tank Defense Priorities, and formerly a full professor at the U.S. Naval War College, based his Sept. 15 argument on a new “Cost of War” report for Watson Institute, and on the more traditional argument, that because of Russian military underfunding and conventional inferiority to combined NATO forces, it can be pushed into using nuclear weapons. Carden quotes Goldstein that: “ ‘It is important that the U.S. not succumb to threat inflation in regards to public and official perceptions of Russia,’ because ‘historically, threat inflation has led to disastrous and unnecessarily costly U.S. foreign policy decisions.’ ”
Goldstein’s Sept. 15 report for the Watson Institute, “Cost of War,” was reported on Sept. 21 in Responsible Statecraft by James Carden, a Washington columnist for Asia Times and former advisor to the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission at the State Department. (https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/Threat%20Inflation%20and%20Russian%20Military%20Weakness_Goldstein_CostsofWar-2.pdf)
