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

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...

Schism

There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...

SSPX / DICI: Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure.

+ JMJ The following is the communiqué of the SSPX regarding the Bishop Williamson's consecration of Fr. Faure. As a follow-up to this article ,  I would like to highlight the rationale for denouncing the consecration. Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure. On March 19, 2015, Bishop Richard Williamson performed the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil. Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure have not been members of the Society of St. Pius X since 2012 and 2014, respectively, because of their violent criticisms of any relations with the Roman authorities. According to them, such contacts were incompatible with the apostolic work of Archbishop Lefebvre.(1) The Society of St. Pius X regrets sincerely that this spirit of opposition has led to an episcopal consecration. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre had c...

Bishop Huonder, SSPX in Schism? - Nope, Consecration of Holy Oils - Update 1

 + JMJ  So Bishop Huonder is in the news for two reasons.  First, his 'Testimony' concerning Pope Francis etc. This was received as a nice reinforcement by Trads (SSPX and others).  Of course, there are those that now are demanding an apostolic investigation.  Yawn, been here before.  This was predictable as other bishops who have followed the same path came to the same conclusions.  It is the way. Second, he celebrated the Chrism Mass and blessed the Holy Oils for use in the SSPX's European chapels and ceremonies.  This caused a stir amongst some Trads who are locked in one or the other statements made by either Archbishop Lefebvre or others. I received two versions of a question regarding this event: Hi Tradical Do you have any comments about doubtful oils in SSPX europe by +Huonder (NO Bishop not conditionally consecrated)? God Bless Hi Tradical Any thoughts on Huonder oil, not conditionally ordained and consecrated by SSPX bishops? God Bless M...