Played like a Fiddle
Appeasement Takes Many Forms, but it Always Involves Abandoning One’s Allies
In 2024 I wrote about the “Great American Appeaser” when Donald Trump made certain remarks at a South Carolina campaign rally concerning our NATO treaty obligations to our allies, and their obligations to us.
The context was Trump reprising his long-standing criticism of those NATO members who were not paying their required share of expenses for their own defense as required by the NATO treaty but instead relying on the U.S. to protect them in the event of war. Trump was asked this question and here was his response:
"Well sir, if we don't pay, and we're attacked by Russia - will you protect us?" Trump quoted the unnamed leader as saying.
"I said: 'You didn't pay? You're delinquent?' He said: 'Yes, let's say that happened.' No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them (Russia) to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay," Trump said.”[1] (emphasis mine)
Words of Concern
The issue for me wasn’t whether our NATO allies should meet their treaty required defense spending obligations. Of course they should, especially today. It was one thing if they couldn’t afford it in the devastating aftermath of World War II’s destruction to their country. But today, there is no reason why they could not meet that treaty requirement.
But what REALLY jumped out at me is how easily Trump would not only turn his back on our allies but encourage Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to them. In the face of the more than half century of post-WWII peace which the NATO treaty has helped ensure, this dismissive attitude was disturbing at many levels. But, most importantly, in the face of Russia’s brutal war being waged on the Ukrainian people, I found this statement chilling.
History Rhymes Yet Again
In light of the continued brutal war that Russia has waged on the nation of Ukraine that President Trump promised to end on his first day in office, and in light of his most recent meeting about the conflict with Russian dictator (and convicted war criminal) Vladimir Putin, I recently reprised my “Great American Appeaser” essay.
In this piece I review historical evidence of the folly of appeasement to a dictator when in 1938 British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain thought he had satiated German Chancellor Adolf Hitler’s appetite for stealing another nation’s land. Chamberlain did this by lauding his “peace in our time” Munich Pact agreement he thought he had obtained from Hitler.
When Chamberlain made this “agreement” with Hitler, Germany had already taken over Austria and the Rhineland in violation of the World War I Treaty of Versailles. In exchange for giving Germany part of then Czechoslovakia (the Sudetenland), Chamberlain thought he had Hitler’s word to cease invading other countries. In exchange, Chamberlain received this “promise of peace” from Hitler. Spoiler alert- this agreement, called the Munich Pact, is viewed by many as the real beginning point of World War II. The bottom line? Hitler lied.
Appeasement Today
With the just ended “peace summit” in Alaska between Putin and Trump and nothing of substance apparently achieved nor announced, now the focus is on this week’s meeting between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinsky.
We should all be watching for what happens this week at this meeting. If Putin’s remarks at the Alaska meeting with Trump is any predictor, the push will be by Trump for Zelensky to cede Ukrainian territory to Russia in exchange for peace. If that happens, it will be a 2025 version of Neville Chamberlain’s disastrous 1938 pact with Hitler. And even if Ukraine did give up some of its land, does anyone really believe Putin, who’s made no secret about “restoring” Russia to former glorious Soviet Union empire would stop there?
What Failing to Support Ukraine Means
Giving into Putin’s demands results in consequences that are epically bad not only for Ukraine, but for the United States and Europe as well as much of the world. The stability of the world order forged by our NATO alliance in the post-World War II era will be turned on its head. This would be much to the delight of not only Russia, but of China, North Korea, and other dictatorships who have longed for democracy’s decline, as well as for the decline of U.S. influence worldwide.
That is what is stake this week if Trump carries out the appeasement to Putin that he has sent all the signals that he plans to do. He’s already, since last week’s Alaska “peace summit” with Putin, made statements that whatever happens next in this war in Ukraine (started by Putin), it’s now up to Zelensky to “make a deal.” Every indication is that Putin has “played” and out flanked Trump completely. So much for the master negotiator Trump and the “art of the deal” who has abandoned any substantive leadership role in creating an outcome that rewards Ukraine by ending the Russian induced hell that they have been going through for years while affirming their territorial integrity.
All this sounds like evading the kind of responsibility for protecting one’s allies that our allies used to expect of America, doesn’t it? Hopefully, our allies still can expect that from us. But realistically, the odds are not looking good.
We should all be on high alert for stopping, through public pressure on Congress, the selling out of Ukraine to Putin the aggressor, war criminal, and thief. The President of the United States, whoever it is, should never allow themselves to be played by anyone.
The stakes are high, and I would like to be optimistic. And in this case, I hope my pessimism is incorrect.
Notes:
“What did Trump say about NATO funding and what is Article 5?”, Reuters
The Munich Agreement: The Actual Beginning of World War II (thecollector.com)