Iuliia Mendel on Twitter: "Every subsequent deal for Ukraine will only be worse — because we are losing. We are losing people, territory, and the economy.
— Iuliia Mendel (@IuliiaMendel) November 22, 2025
The EU (which by the way has paid Russia more than €311 billion for energy and goods since February 2022) has no real strategy, no way to stop fueling… pic.twitter.com/zx8lBKQn7X
When retweeting someone you've never previously heard of who is expressing a controversial view that you happen to agree with, it's best to check who they are just in case they're some sort of political extremist, but as far as I can see Iuliia Mendel's credentials are absolutely fine - indeed she's President Zelensky's former Press Secretary.
Her views chime with mine, which is that the Ukraine war has become a sort of Death Factory, comparable to the long stretches of the First World War when hundreds of thousands of men were callously sacrificed by military leaders in pursuit of pitifully tiny gains of territory. In other words, what is being fought for in the real world, rather than in the world of rhetoric, is now too small to justify the loss of life. Russia cannot realistically conquer Ukraine, while Ukraine cannot realistically recapture all - or anything like all - of the territory it has lost. What is actually been fought for is thus the precise location of a post-war border or armistice line or "line of actual control", and the fine details of that question are far better decided by peace talks rather than by industrial-scale slaughter of young people who under the law of the two countries cannot actually choose for themselves whether they wish to fight and die or not. So don't try to tell me that continuing the war is all about "freedom".
Ms Mendel's point about "human life being the highest good" equates in its purest form to pacifism, which is an ideal I've always been very attracted to. In practice I accept that pacifism has some limitations, because it wouldn't have worked against the Nazis, and Ghandian passive resistance would have been a hopeless tool in preventing the Holocaust. Genuinely defensive military campaigns may therefore be morally justified even if they cause substantial loss of life, but that is not what we're talking about here. What can realistically be defended has already been successfully defended.
Of course some political leaders argue that the war has to be continued no matter what the cost because of a wild, wholly unproven theory that Putin is the new Hitler and he will invade the rest of Europe if he is not stopped in Ukraine, just as Hitler conquered much of Europe after Britain and France failed to defend Czechoslovakia. But with all due respect, if Putin was Hitler I think we might just have noticed by now. He's been leader of Russia since 31st December 1999, so if he has Napoleonic ambitions he's been remarkably slow about taking any action on them. The 28 point peace proposal, which has been criticised for being "handwritten by the Russians", almost certainly gives a much truer guide to Putin's war aims, which are seemingly limited to consolidating the territorial gains already made, prevention of further NATO expansion, and a return to the international community (such as membership of the G8) from a position of strength. Indeed the latter point would be completely irreconcilable with invasions of Finland, Poland or the Baltic states.
There's also the small matter here of the fact that Russia has the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons, and if the Ukraine war isn't ended there is always the theoretical chance of an escalation that leads to human civilisation being destroyed by nuclear war. Previous generations understood that morally difficult compromises and concessions sometimes had to be made to preserve nuclear peace - for example NATO made no attempt to defend Hungary in 1956 or Czechoslovakia in 1968. Some principles are not worth risking global destruction for, and that's a truth our political and military leaders seem to have lost sight of somewhere along the line. To put it mildly, those hyping up and agitating for a wider conflict with Russia are deeply irresponsible.
Last but not least, I want to address an accusation that has been levelled at me when I've made points like these in the past, namely that I'm applying different standards to Ukraine and Gaza. That is categorically untrue. What I've called for in Palestine is a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 boundaries. Those boundaries are exceptionally favourable to Israel (much more favourable than the original UN partition plan, for example) and were won at the point of a gun. The international community rewarded Israel's military aggression in 1948 by recognising the territory it invaded as its sovereign land. The State of Palestine has reconciled itself to that profound injustice in the hope of a lasting peace and of self-determination within its reduced territory. It will probably also end up accepting total demilitarisation, even though there's no reason why it should have to, other than the 'might is right' principle.
What may be asked of Ukraine is actually not quite as punitive as that. It's more akin to Austria accepting permanent neutral status in return for Soviet withdrawal in 1955. That neutrality has since developed into a key part of Austrian national identity and a source of tremendous pride. Who knows, something similar may yet happen in Ukraine.
A thoughtful, and courageous position which will, as you say, attract pelters from the usual commenters.
ReplyDeleteWhat many people selectively ignore is that Kyiv has morphed post 2014 into an ethno-supremacist state. Zelensky’s position that there’s only one language in Ukraine, and that’s Ukrainian is what keeps the conflict going. Failure to respect the Minsk Accords (I & II), and accept that the geographical boundaries of a state determined under Soviet rule, incorporated multiple languages, and people lie at the heart of this. Interestingly, Ukraine managed to maintain a balance from 1991 to 2014, when the US State Department stepped in.
As someone old enough to have been beaten with a leather strap in primary school for using the Scots language, I have some appreciation of the position of Russian, Romanian, Hungarian, Polish, and Pontic Greek speakers trapped in an ethno-supremacist regime.
Oh that such a historical perspective were available to knee-jerk supporters of the Kyiv regime who purport to support the cause of Scottish independence, such as Stewart McDonald. Then again, McDonald’s paycheque these days comes directly from the Military Industrial Complex, so go figure.
It's certainly the case that a lot of the 'Gung Ho' stuff about not giving an inch to Russian aggression in Ukraine is done from armchairs, at a safe distance, and is thus pretty revolting when we consider who has to do the dying.
ReplyDeleteI do think that there is one point which ought to be considered which I can't see in James' piece. Putin is about the same age as me and is certain, despite his blether about organ transplants and "living for ever", to be increasingly aware of his own mortality.
The important question is - who follows him ?
If he 'wins' we'll get another expansionist gangster. If he 'loses' there is at least some chance that Russia wont be landed with a new, younger head banger.
From my comfortable position I have no rights in this one. All that I can say is that for as long as Ukraine feels able to defend itelf it should be supported. Partial and open ended I know but anything more is beyond our limited moral rights is this horrendous matter.
I see by your comment Alt Clut that the western media "force" (propaganda)is strong within you, considering that russian supporting media is censored and banned in uk where do you think these stories of living forever and lots of others come from the old "is that true or did you hear it on the bbc " springs to mind, or perhaps the "sun" ?
DeleteSub-clause 20a, of the 28 point plan states:
ReplyDelete* Ukraine will adopt EU rules on religious tolerance and the protection of linguistic minorities.
This will come as a shock for the Russian speaking population of Latvia, who have been denied citizenship rights since the foundation of that state.
The Russian Federation would be crazy to sign up to this deal while Ursula von der Leyen, and her rabid Russophobic, High Commissioner Kaja Kallas remain in position.
In fact the Russians would be advised not to sign anything ‘till the European Commission is put back in its box, and reminded that it’s a secretariat function for a grouping of sovereign states.
Very difficult to regard Ukraine in the same way as Gaza.
ReplyDeleteGaza is quite simply a genocidal massacre of the innocents, whereas there are many, many questions over the type of State Ukraine had become before the Russian invasion.
In both cases, though, the old 'pawn in a much bigger game' adage rings true and the World powers involved do not give a rat's arse about the massive colletral damage inflicted on non-combatants.
Same old same old.
Not everybody can remain neutral though. Easy for Austria and Ireland when they know full well they'd be protected anyway.
ReplyDeleteUkraine has an aggressive state on its broader so requires a security gaurantee.
It certainly wasn't easy for Austria at the time it actually became neutral - it was right at the Cold War faultline.
DeleteThe current generation of political leaders in Finland and Sweden signing up to NATO membership with their respective parliaments (for the time being at least) was a historical aberration and the culmination of decades of careful cultivation by the US State Department.
DeleteThe Prime Minister of Finland when it joined NATO (4th April 2023) was Sanna Marin. At 34 when she became PM, Marin was the poster girl for identity politics (having been substantially raised by a single sex couple) and championing the propagation of Western, liberal values globally. When her Social Democratic Party lost its status as the largest party in the General Election of 2023, Marin was replaced as PM by the leader of the National Coalition Party. Rather than serve on the backbenches, Marin resigned from Finish politics and assumed the position of “strategic adviser” at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change.
Young middle-class politics graduates devoid of real work and life experience, promoted through invisible networks of patronage and opaquely funded third-sector influencing outfits. The common currency these apparatchiks exchange is Identity Politics.
Previous generations of Scandinavian politicians would never have agreed to NATO membership. The proposition is preposterous. Finland & Sweden managed to remain neutral while sharing a land and maritime borders with a notionally ideological and expansionist Soviet Union. The idea that the Russian Federation is about to occupy non-Russian speaking territory is crazy. Yes, I’m well aware of Russian expansion into Finland during Tsarist times and the Winter War during Stalin’s time.
The folk of Finland will pay the price for this Foggy Bottom directed lunacy. Finnish defence spending in terms of GDP has expanded by 50% in four years. In addition, Finnish / Russian trade has ceased. Prior to this, Finland exported $2b pa worth of goods to Russia and received $5b pa of goods in return. Russian exports substantially comprised raw materials for Finnish industry. This is roughly equally divided between Hydrocarbons which can be sourced elsewhere (at a greater cost) and semi-processed, scarce minerals (primarily Nickel) which were traditionally refined using Finland’s abundant Hydroelectric power capacity. The cumulative effect will impact hard on living standards of ordinary citizens in Helsinki.
* Note; “the Father of the Industrial Revolution in Finland” was James Finlayson (1771 - 1852), an autodidactic Scots engineer who built the first water powered textile mill in the country.
Beneath the performative, blood ‘n’ guts, propaganda emanating from Zelensky, (Zelensky does himself no favours with such recent nonsense as “the Russians are encircled in Kupyansk, and Pokrovsk”) there are hints that compromise may be possible. Sure, there have been instances in previous conflicts where there have been exchanges of the corpses of the fallen while fighting continues, but I can’t think of any other examples of able bodied prisoners of war being exchanged during an active conflict.
ReplyDeleteAt some level, those in power in Kyiv must know that the 28 point plan is a reasonable starting point for a negotiated settlement. The problem is the threat of assassination from the Right Sector and other ultra nationalist groups for anyone hinting at compromise in the form of territorial concessions.
The ceeding of South Tyrol is a way more apt comparison than the Allied forces leaving what was a part of Nazi Germany.
ReplyDeleteTalk of restoring Russia to the G8 is wildly optimistic. They've slipped to ninth and it's estimated that up to a third of their economy has become the mirage of war spending. If Russia tries to stop, demobilise and unwind its military-industrial sector, it may slide down to around 15th place or even further if civil unrest is triggered.
ReplyDeleteThat's the real problem with reaching peace. Russia has gotten itself into a situation where even if the entirety of Ukraine is handed over, that won't be enough to save Russian leaders from the consequences.
Anonymous 11:35 - It's actually pretty irrelevant whether or not Putin fantasises about being a Marvel Comics hero.
ReplyDeleteThe point is he's led an invasion that he thought would be a cheap win. Hundreds of thousands have died, on both sides, for his wet dreams of imperial power and you want to make excuses for him. Do you do the same for Trump ? Does their ruthless contempt for others give you a thrill ? Contemptible !