Plan B for Ukraine

As the prospects for Ukraine fade US elites have a new (old) idea

French President Macron's recent rhetoric about sending French combat troops to Ukraine have little to do with Ukraine or Russia and everything to do with Marine Le Pen and the increasing threat her party posses to Macron. In a way Macron is the Joe Biden of France: A liberal internationalist who is in the process of loosing power to rising populism. Macron like Biden can only double down on policies that are failing because it is too late for either of them to catch the ever stronger populist wave and so they pander to their base in an attempt to delay the politically inevitable.

The chatter by Macron and others about sending Western troops to Ukraine is intended to broaden and deepen the mood in the West for negotiation since the Euro elites know how unpopular such a policy would be. In this way those elites can moot a policy they know is actually impossible to implement - then they can feign assent to the popular will of the European people by beginning to negotiate.

All this slight of hand is due to the constricted maneuver space these Euro elites have. The Euro elites are slowly but inevitably loosing political power to Euro-sceptic populist parties who are opposed to continued war. This is similar to the US where the populist right is gaining and the internationalists are loosing power to conservative nationalists.

US foreign policy realists understand what is happening and are resigned to Plan B. For these US realists Plan A was for the the Ukraine war to bleed Russia dry and permanently deprive Europe, namely Germany from access to Russian geopolitical alliance and resources. Plan A is just a continuation of the same long term US policy in place ever since the end of the First World War. The liberal ideology of "self-determination of nations" as espoused by President Wilson and other America foreign policy elites between the wars was intended to fragment the geopolitical space between Germany and Russia.

The guiding principle of American hegemonic policy ever since that time has been to prevent Germany from freely accessing Russian resources (c.f. Nord Stream 2) and prevent a Russo-German political alliance which might spell the end of US hegemony over Europe.

The 20th century American policies of self determination of nations (post WW1) and anti-communism (post WW2) were just like the current "protect Ukraine" US policy: Each is a version of the same policy intended to insure the fragmentation of the space between Germany and Russia.

As mentioned above, 'Plan A' was intended to enlist America’s European allies (vassals) to bleed Russia dry and defeat Russia militarily, but now it is clear that this has become very unlikely thus the need for a Plan B.

But it is important to understand that Plan B is not a plan to rescue Ukraine. Plan B, just like Plan A will implement the long term prime directive of American policy which, just like US "self-determination of nations", anti-communism, and the "protect Ukraine" policy is intended to weaken Europe (namely Germany) and maintain US hegemony. Specifically Plan B posits that if Ukraine is "lost" it is better for the US if Europe is engaged in a futile struggle over control of Ukrainian territory than the alternative, a real peace and accommodation between Europe and Russia. Therefor Plan B is to encourage Europeans to fight Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Plan B is not yet an American policy set in stone as evidenced by the recent 'retirement' of the war hawk and Hillary Clinton acolyte Nuland.

The next few weeks will reveal whether European elites will surrender their own peoples’ interests to Plan B or whether the populist wave beginning to sweep Europe will result in the start of a real negotiated settlement.

I predicted two years ago that the war would only end with the political defeat of the liberal internationalists who are keeping it going. These US and European elites are running out of time.