Skip to main content

Perspectives on Russia / Putin's War with the Ukraine

 +
JMJ

 As I write this on March 26th, I have no idea if the war in the Ukraine will have abated or engulfed the rest of the world.  Either way, I am confident that the consecration has been done and that it was late but not too late.  More on this in another article.

From some perspectives the way they are isolating and pushing the Russian people into an economic and social corner seems very short sighted.  It's is almost as if the liberal westerners believe they can "cancel" Russia.  

I remember when there was an 'uprising' in the Ukraine that ousted a legitimately elected pro-Russian president. At the time I remember seeing some references to a CIA involvement and that Russia at least believed this report.  It precipitated a number of events that have since taken place and I believe is based on a simple tenet: Might makes Right. 

If the West will break agreements that were made to give Russia a sense of security (Nato expansion etc) and the CIA is involved in overthrowing legitimate governments ... then Russia will seek to promote its own security with the means at hand.

Hence we have seen a widening gulf between the 'west' and Russia, the annexation of Crimea, bolstering of Northern bases etc.

As the authoer of the Crisis article Understanding the Russion Invasion of Ukraine (link) wrote: I'm not justifying, I'm trying to understand the underlying motivations.  Without this understanding, a negotiation is doomed to fail.

Key points in the article (which I recommend you read in full) :


The invasion must be condemned, period. But we must understand what led to this horrific act by Russia, not to justify it, but with the goal of deescalating today’s conflict and preventing future ones. 

This is an important point, we need to look at what led to this situation and fix it.  This may involve some significant amounts of crow upon the part of the 'west'.
 

As with bin Laden, we should explain the reasons for Putin’s popularity in Russia. We’d be wrong to say young Muslim men supported bin Laden simply because they are inherently evil; just so, it’s both wrong and unhelpful to castigate the Russian people as villains. This is not a Catholic perspective, nor one that strives for peace.

I have noticed a trend of the USA creating its own enemies, ala bin Laden, South America etc by their hubris and interference.
Unfortunately it was during this critical time that the West, led by the United States, did not reach out to them to build them up as an ally, but instead treated them as a defeated foe that could be trampled upon. We promised no expansion of NATO east of Germany, but soon broke that promise, eventually extending NATO’s borders all the way to the Russian border. The West felt it could just dictate—and later change—terms as it saw fit.
Again, if the 'West' won't abide by rule of law, why should Russia?

When a pro-Russian presidential candidate was democratically elected in Ukraine in 2010, the US backed a coup to overthrow him in 2014. To the average Russian, this was a clear and dangerous anti-Russian move by the West. It was the US working on the very borders of Russia to oppose his nation. Imagine how the average American would feel if Russia acted in a similar way in Mexico or Canada?

This was, I believe the turning point as noted above.

It’s very easy in a time of war or potential war to demonize those we perceive as our enemy. As Catholics we must instead work for peace which includes understanding how our own actions have contributed to our current situation. This does not mean refusing to recognize the evil of Putin’s actions, but instead seeing why those actions have such widespread support in his country. Only then we can work to resolve things as peaceably as possible.

From my perspective, the demonizing and 'cancelling' of all Russian's outside of Russia is simply going to reinforce their perspective that the 'West' is operating on a might is right as opposed to rule of law.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but this is no way to bring about a lasting peace.  Thank God that Pope Francis made the consecration.

P^3

 

Comments

  1. Re: Putin’s Attack On Ukraine
    I agree with most o your post. However the fact that you agree with Putin position before the war are just words. Nothing was done about it, The complains were made at least the last 8 years and nothing was done. What we have now is certainly over kill causing lot of suffering. Unfortunately this is partially due to a miscalculation, since I feel originally Putin only wanted a quick regime change, which would have taken less lifes. I do not want to excuse the behaviour of the bear. He is responsible for its action. But who continuously irritates the bear has some responsibility too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Given the severe lack of reliable information regarding the Russia/Ukraine situation, I've taken the position of not taking any position, even regarding "the invasion must be condemned, period." I would not be at all surprised to learn in ten years that Putin was decidedly justified in making a pre-emptive defensive move in this case (if such a thing is possible) given that we know now that the US WAS funding bio-labs in Ukraine, among other things which might justify military action. We do not and may never have all the information needed to fully understand the situation.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX: Why Is the SSPX So Criticized?

 + JMJ As long as you are ok with what happens in other Catholic Churches, Traditional Catholics will be left 'alone'.  This is a paraphrase of words spoken by an Archbishop to Traditional Catholics (with a sprinkling of SSPX) who had requested the Traditional Latin Mass under Summorum Pontificum. This reflects that attitude of the Church towards anyone who takes issue with some of the ambiguities of Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium.  If you reject the papacy but are ok with V2, the New Mass, and what Rome has stated since 1965 - then you are welcome. Question some of the more abiguous statements and ask for Rome to realise that a circle is not a square - then you are in for a world of hurt. This is where the SSPX exists and has existed from almost its very first moments. Pointing out contradictions with previous magisterium is not acceptable - under any condition. Why? Because it will cause the whole V2 house of cards to fall. I guess only when the contradic...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

Correcting Caricatures of the SSPX

 + JMJ Introduction First, a little background on the FSSP St. John Vianney Chapel in Mission Hill Kansas.  After the 1988 consecrations and the foundation of the FSSP there was a consistent trend of Dioceses allowing the SSPX to run chapels and churches near SSPX locations. As with any 'organizational change' there were those who didn't agree with the change and no longer sought the sacraments from the SSPX. I heard from friends that in that era there was a lot of anger and tension (on both sides) between the St. Mary's SSPX and Mission Hill FSSP.  Second, there have been caricatures of the SSPX position (some are evident below) in which personal opinions of SSPX priests and laity are taken as the official position or conflated with those of sedevacantists or 'resistance'. Recent Perspectives of the SSPX Position In the shadow of the consecrations a fever pitch accusations and opinions how surfaced - many of which include caricatures of the SSPX positions, of w...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...