Kira Rudik   

Member Of Parliament at Verhovna Rada of Ukraine

• Golos
• Stanford University

Jan 6, 2025

I have finished reading Bob Woodward’s book “The War” which addresses events in President Biden’s administration from late 2021 to the recent developments surrounding the decision to refrain from running for president.

This book is both interesting and useful for us, as we are essentially silent participants in these events, upon which our lives vitally depend, yet the essence of these matters does not always reach Ukraine directly from Capitol Hill.

What struck me the most:

• the extent to which the American leader and his entourage believed in the possibility of putin using nuclear weapons. This leads to a particularly painful quote for us:

“If we do not completely drive russia out of Ukraine, we will, to some extent, allow putin to achieve his goals. And if we manage to expel him, we risk nuclear war. putin will not allow himself to be ousted without using nuclear weapons. Thus, we are mired in this situation. Significant successes lead to the potential for nuclear escalation, while minimal successes bring unclear long-term consequences”.

For the first time, the strategy of “Not winning and not losing in Ukraine” has been articulated, which contradicts both the assurances of our partners and our own interests.

• how swiftly and unequivocally the focus shifted from the question of Ukraine to that of Israel and the terrorist attack by Hamas.

For us in Ukraine, there was a lingering feeling that we could maintain global attention, given the undeniable and diverse causal-political components in the war in Ukraine and in the operations in Israel.

However, the book succinctly transitions to the Middle East in just one paragraph, and for the following several chapters, the attention shifts resolutely, with the issue of Ukraine receding to the moment of a deadlock in Congress regarding the vote on the aid package.

• how systematically different the assistance and support provided by the United States to Israel is in comparison to that for Ukraine.

Those who have been waking up and going to sleep for three consecutive years under rocket and drone attacks from the enemy read with bated breath how allies intercept hundreds of Iranian missiles launched at Israel (110 ballistic missiles).

• The United States believes it has acted adequately and correctly at every step.

I recommend it for reading.

……….

Comment from :

Andrii Prokopets

Very interesting post Kira. I’ll read the book. Thank you. On the related note, it seems as the USA has the same approach in Ukraine as it used in Vietnam and earlier in North Korea. Once the probability of nuclear war becomes very high the US withdraws their support under whatever pretences. The reason is quite pragmatic. The only way the USA can be seriously attacked is by nuclear weapon. On the other hand, in my personal opinion, putin will not use nuclear weapon against USA and EU. China and ruzzia have too much money and property in those countries to lose. However, using nuclear weapon in Ukraine is still possible. This is really tough situation.

Stephen Vaughan

I finished it last week. A lot of revelations and a lot of sweary and tough talk from Biden. In fairness to them at the time they were being hit with a firehose of intel and, by Jake Sullivan’s account in 2023, soucing artillary shells was a massive task. That said, a very big question hangs over the commitment of the US when it comes to oreign policy and in this instance the conflict id very high stakes and one that concerns us all. It warrents leadership that has a backbone and not prone to caving at the first hurdle of the nuclear threat bluff.

Looking to Michael Schwartz’s comment regarding Woodward, there was a samll suspicion of hagiography as I read this.

Michael Schwartz

Many thanks for this very thoughtful and hyperbole-free post. I am typically not a fan of Woodward, finding him gossipy and superficial. And I’ve not read the book. But I do believe that what you describe here will be corroborated over the coming decades and immortalize Biden as this century’s Neville Chamberlain. I also think it is a mistake to regard his support of Israel as qualitatively different from his support of Ukraine. It has been quantitatively different but similarly equivocal and cowardly, and history will bear that out as well. Harry Truman would be ashamed of his party and his country.

Steve Asplin

Yes, Kira, the idea that we can’t let Russia lose, is an integral facet to American foreign policy in their response to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Many believe that if Russia were to lose it would disintegrate and that someone even less stable than Putin would have control of a huge nuclear arsenal. Judge by actions not by words.

A commenter named Gene Chaas turned up to put what might be summarized as the JD Vance view:

US/Israel has always been a “special” relationship. US relationship with Ukraine is still nascent. Yet it is not like there are lots of Ukrainians here in the in media or politics ; which describes “special” in special relationship.