Not the first time Biden has been over his head in foreign policy; the loss of Sunni-dominated Iraq as a buffer against Iran being a key example (a Sunni general opposite to Saddam Hussein would have done).
But "to get India and China to commit to isolating Russia if Russia were to violate the settlement"
It's hard to see what China can possibly gain from a weakened or isolated Russia, especially with their competition against the US, thus their interest in restraining Russia in Ukraine is nil.
"The Chinese have a very strong interest in having a seat at the table. "
Having a seat at a table and actively restraining a close ally are two different things, witness China's history at the UN Security Council.
China has greater affinity with Russia and its government model and far less conflicts of interest with it than with the West. They have much to gain by keeping Russia entangled in Ukraine and supporting its claims, which force Russia into China's corner. This provides China with below-market raw materials, markets for its products and access to high-tech military items, like jet engines, that China still has not been able to develop on its own.
There are no benefits to China of an alternate course as Western powers will remain opposed to it on Taiwan and are more hesitant now to transfer technology that they have been in a generation.
Without arguing particulars, the problem is that even if Biden wanted to give an offramp, he can't, lest Team R pounce and scream about Munich and appeasement.
The converse would happen if a President Trump were to do the same. In fact, Team D endorsed a crackpot conspiracy theory, just to limit any of Trump's freedom of action.
The likely course of action is throwing Ukraine under the bus as soon as China announces the new reserve currency and embargoes exports of Taiwanese chips to unfriendly countries.
Of course, we would have thrown them under the bus in any case, but China is a good excuse.
I wouldn’t go so far. But that’s surely the baseline scenario. I do believe that we can do better at the bargaining table because it is ultimately in Russia’s interest to trade away the territorial gains in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality. They’ll probably demand autonomy for the Russian-speaking regions and caps on Ukrainian arms as well. The devil is always in the detail. But the broad picture of a great power settlement of the Ukraine question has been clear all along.
Contra, note also the MSM articles in recent days practically drooling at the prospect of a nuclear war.
Source?
Daniel Larison provides and dissects plenty of examples from the western MSM.
No one in the mainstream media is “salivating” that’s bs
Daniel Larison's substack provides plenty of examples, dissecting articles from outlets such as the NYT and WSJ.
Not the first time Biden has been over his head in foreign policy; the loss of Sunni-dominated Iraq as a buffer against Iran being a key example (a Sunni general opposite to Saddam Hussein would have done).
But "to get India and China to commit to isolating Russia if Russia were to violate the settlement"
It's hard to see what China can possibly gain from a weakened or isolated Russia, especially with their competition against the US, thus their interest in restraining Russia in Ukraine is nil.
The Chinese have a very strong interest in having a seat at the table.
"The Chinese have a very strong interest in having a seat at the table. "
Having a seat at a table and actively restraining a close ally are two different things, witness China's history at the UN Security Council.
China has greater affinity with Russia and its government model and far less conflicts of interest with it than with the West. They have much to gain by keeping Russia entangled in Ukraine and supporting its claims, which force Russia into China's corner. This provides China with below-market raw materials, markets for its products and access to high-tech military items, like jet engines, that China still has not been able to develop on its own.
There are no benefits to China of an alternate course as Western powers will remain opposed to it on Taiwan and are more hesitant now to transfer technology that they have been in a generation.
That picture is at least a decade out of date.
Without arguing particulars, the problem is that even if Biden wanted to give an offramp, he can't, lest Team R pounce and scream about Munich and appeasement.
The converse would happen if a President Trump were to do the same. In fact, Team D endorsed a crackpot conspiracy theory, just to limit any of Trump's freedom of action.
The likely course of action is throwing Ukraine under the bus as soon as China announces the new reserve currency and embargoes exports of Taiwanese chips to unfriendly countries.
Of course, we would have thrown them under the bus in any case, but China is a good excuse.
The country will be divided at the Dnieper one way or another.
I wouldn’t go so far. But that’s surely the baseline scenario. I do believe that we can do better at the bargaining table because it is ultimately in Russia’s interest to trade away the territorial gains in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality. They’ll probably demand autonomy for the Russian-speaking regions and caps on Ukrainian arms as well. The devil is always in the detail. But the broad picture of a great power settlement of the Ukraine question has been clear all along.
I'm just not sure the Blob will accept something that reasonable, though. They might be fixated on endless war leading to regime change in Russia now.
Why do you say “anthropological lines” instead of cultural?
It’s a broader concept. I picked up the usage from Todd.