This recent interview with Über-Realist John Mearsheimer is a great example of why I find his analysis simultaneously informative and frustrating. The realist foreign policy theories give particular emphasis to economic and political power factors and tend to minimize the practical effect of ideological and moral considerations when it comes to the actual behaviors of great powers, in particular.
But here we have Mearsheimer sounding like a rightwinger’s stereotype of moralistic leftwingers. Speaking of the ongoing Gaza genocide, he says (after 11:50 in the video), “This is what’s happened to American values! The United States is supporting an apartheid state that’s engaged in genocide. Do you need to know any more?” (1)
And his affect suggests that he’s earnestly outraged by this development. He seems to think that his interviewer Andrew Napolitano, who has been highly critical of Israel’s policies since October 7, 2023, is insufficiently agitated by the facts they’re discussing.
They also talk about the Signal Chat incident.
On the Russia-Ukraine War and the possibility of war with Iran, Mearsheimer does not see a lot of grounds for optimism. On the latter, he thinks Trump himself would prefer not to go to war with Iran at this point. But he also notes that Trump’s senior advisors tend to be pro-Israel hawks. And that Trump himself has a record of being very accommodating to the demands of Israel and of his pro-Israel donors like Marian Adelson.
Europe and the new diplomatic vocabulary
Mearsheimer stresses the peacekeeping or “security” force that Ukraine and the main European allies are discussing as an essential element of a settlement of the war is effectively a dead letter. The forces that Britain and France could commit to such an arrangement are limited. And he notes that both Germany and Poland have said they would not contribute soldiers to such a force.
The Russians have said they will not accept such a force in Ukraine. And there is every reason to believe at this point that they are serious about that and will not accept any agreement that involves stationing forces from NATO countries in Ukraine.
Robert Fox, defense editor of the conservative London Evening Standard argues that the European allies are determined to draw the line against Russian aggression in Ukraine. (2)
But what does that mean? As Fox indicates, that could be a 4-5 years’ commitment to actively supporting Ukraine in a war with Russia. This is a policy that could and probably will function as a double-edged sword. On the one hand, Europe will defend Ukrainian sovereignty, which is also defending the current system of international law. Which is more-or-less equivalent (but not exactly) to what the US at least through the Biden Administration calls “the rules-based international order.”
On the other hand, as Europe reconfigures its defense posture to be able to operate without its current US-dominated NATO configurations, they will being doing so with the knowledge that they have a selfish interest in keeping the Russian fighting in Ukraine for as long as possible. It was pretty clearly the Biden Administration’s assumption that a longer war in Ukraine rather than a shorter one would weaken Russia. The practical benefits to the European allies of a longer rather than shorter Russia-Ukraine War would be that it would buy time for Europe to de-NATO-ize its defense posture without having to face a potential new military crisis against European countries that are currently NATO alliance members. Especially with the Trump Administration actually threatening (with God-only-knows what level of seriousness) NATO allies Denmark and Canada with military attacks.
Fox also comments on the lack of diplomatic competence in the Trump 2.0 regime. And how that is very much a part of the current urgency for the European allies to distance themselves sooner rather than later from their current dependency on NATO structure.
And he mentions that the only realistic possibility of a security or peacekeeping force for any peace or armistice agreement that might be reached would have to be a UN force. He doesn’t specify it, but this would almost certainly have to exclude any NATO member forces.
Notes:
(1) Prof. John Mearsheimer : Killing Without Purpose. Judge Napolitano-Judging Freedom YouTube channel 03/27/2025. <https://www.youtube.com/live/n69N9h4A8N4?si=Cul6Qn75BcuIo6im> (Accessed: 2025--28-2025).
(2) Putin’s war will be over in a few months. Times Radio YouTube channel 05/28/2025. <https://youtu.be/uB9JrjoXH6c?si=HmE0Bmx0rHVPEP4w> (Accessed: 2025--28-2025).
No comments:
Post a Comment