A Nation’s Fate, &c.
On Ukraine, a Trump-Putin summit, the Nobel Peace Prize, a ‘J6-er’ at the Justice Department, and more
A headline from the Associated Press reads, “Russia and Ukraine hold fast to their demands ahead of a planned Putin-Trump summit.” (Article here.) Yes. Ukraine’s demand is that it remain a free and independent country. Russia’s demand is that it subjugate Ukraine, as before.
***
Over the decades, comparisons to Munich, and Yalta, have perhaps been too promiscuous. But some are apt. Anyone thinking about Munich, when thinking about Alaska, where President Trump and Vladimir Putin are scheduled to huddle, can be excused, I think.
***
Will Ukrainians have any say? Any say over the fate of their country? Or are they incidental to this drama?
***
Day after day, Russia terrorizes and murders Ukrainians. Russian attacks have more than doubled since Trump was sworn in last January. (For an article about this, go here.) Do you think a cessation of these attacks—a pause—should have been a precondition of a summit? Of a summit between the American president and Putin, on American soil?
Certainly Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, and virtually every other Republican would have thought so, in the “Before Times.”
***
Garry Kasparov made an excellent point, via Nigel Short, a fellow chess player (an Englishman born in 1965). Short once said that, when your opponent offers you a draw, you should stop and consider why he thinks he is losing.
Said Kasparov, “Putin is showing more interest in negotiations because his position is getting worse, and he knows Trump will help.”
***
“Peace” is in the air—not peace itself but the word. Defenders of Trump say to me, “Don’t you want peace? What’s wrong with pursuing peace?” Nothing. But Ukrainians, Balts, Poles, and others keep trying to tell thick-headed Westerners: “There is nothing peaceful about Russian occupation.”
***
Lately, I have been getting calls from news organizations, wanting me to talk about the Nobel Peace Prize. That is because Trump is openly jonesin’ for the prize. And I wrote a history of it, Peace, They Say.
Possibly the most stinging criticism of the prize I ever heard, came from Tony Blair. When he was about to begin another round of talks in the Arab-Israeli conflict, he quipped to George W. Bush, “If I win the Nobel Peace Prize, you will know I have failed.”
Trump is hungry—lip-smackingly hungry—for the peace prize. There is such a thing as being too hungry.
***
The U.S. ambassador to NATO said something interesting, when talking about what Trump and Putin might do to Ukraine. He said, “No big chunks or sections are going to be just given that haven’t been fought for or earned on the battlefield.”
There is a rule against mentioning Hitler and the Nazis. Nothing is like Hitler and the Nazis. I violate this rule when I think it right—as now: Did Hitler and the Wehrmacht “earn” the territory they conquered?
More simply: Does might make right?
If I invaded and occupied your house, have I earned a right to it? Squatters’ rights or something?
This is madness.
***
Right now, there are people who are saying, “There’s no way Russian soldiers can be evicted from Ukrainian soil. Be realistic.” But remember: There were people saying in early 2022—the same people?—that Putin would take Ukraine in about three days.
***
Now and then, those of us who live in peace and plenty should face the horror—should acquaint ourselves with the horror that other people endure. Here is a story from Meduza, the Russian news organization in exile. It is titled “Russian occupation authorities publish database of Ukrainian children for adoption, sortable by hair and eye color.” Mykola Kuleba, the founder and leader of Save Ukraine, comments, “The way they describe our children is no different from a slave catalogue. This is modern-day child trafficking, and the world must put a stop to it.”
***
Look homeward (if, like me, you’re an American). There is a man named Jared Wise. He was a January 6th rioter, or insurrectionist, or whatever you want to call them. He had some words for the policemen on the scene: “Nazi,” “Gestapo.” He cried to his fellow rioters, “Kill ’em! Kill ’em!” “Get ’em! Get ’em!”
“So what?” you say. “That describes hundreds and hundreds of people, Trump’s pardonees.” You are right—but this particular “J6-er” is now a senior adviser at the Justice Department.
To read about this, go here.
(“Back the blue,” they say. Yeah, right. That is highly situational.)
***
Here is a notice from the DHS:
In a tweet, Jonah Goldberg returned to a question from almost 25 years ago. I had almost forgotten about it. Jonah wrote,
I remember thinking people who got extremely upset by the name “Homeland” were overreacting. I owe them an apology.
I, for one, was not extremely upset by this use of “homeland”—but I was uncomfortable with it. It did not seem ... quite us. Quite American. “Department of Homeland Security” seemed like an agency of governments elsewhere—governments of a different nature from ours.
It so happens, I was part of an event that included Vernon Walters, around the time the DHS was created. Walters, as you remember, was a venerable Army general, diplomat, and spymaster. He and I discussed this matter of “homeland”—the word. He, too, was uncomfortable with it, and on the same grounds: “Not quite us.”
But one can get used to anything, I suppose, and “Department of Homeland Security” is now as natural to me as “McDonald’s.”
***
How about “to advocate for”? Is that natural? “I advocated for John to get a promotion,” rather than “I advocated that John get a promotion”? To some of us, the first sentence is solecistic. But “to advocate for” has crept into the American tongue.
A few days ago, I noticed that The New Yorker published an article that included this very error, or usage. That, to me, is a white flag—an official surrender. If The New Yorker publishes an error, it is, sort of officially, no longer an error. The language has truly “evolved.”
I guess ...
***
Throw a quick music review at you? The Salzburg Festival is staging Maria Stuarda, one of Donizetti’s Tudor operas (there are two others). My review is here. Prickly issues arise.
***
Yesterday, at Onward and Upward, I published “Secret Views”—giving a couple of my own and inviting you to contribute yours. The responses, the contributions, have been interesting indeed. I will publish a selection of them soon.
Thank you, my friends, and very best.
Thanks as always for your daily meditations, Jay. "This is madness." Enough said.
I always enjoyed your Salzburg Journals at NR, despite not being a fan of the featured music. Your descriptions of the city, including the people, have earned it a place on my visiting bucket list.