Suggested Answers to the Short Quiz

[johnkarls]

.

Suggested Answers to the Short Quiz – America Dis-Honering Its 1994 Written & Signed Guarantee of Ukraine’s Independence and Territorial Integrity For Ukraine Surrendering Its 1,900 Nuclear Missiles


********************
Part A – America’s 1994 Written & Signed Guarantee (Its Text As Submitted to the U.N. is available as a downloadable Adobe.pdf file at viewtopic.php?f=680&t=2162&sid=370b7aa0 ... 9cbd15b05d)


Question 1

On 12/26/1991, did the USSR (aka Soviet Union aka Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) cease to exist?

Answer 1

Yes.

Question 2

In other words, on 12/26/1991 did the leaders of the three largest “Soviet Socialist Republics” (Russia, Ukraine and Belarus) declare that the USSR no longer existed and did the remaining 11 “Soviet Socialist Republics” join them shortly thereafter in recognizing that all of the SSR’s were now independent?

Answer 2

Yes.

Question 3

Did the dissolution leave Ukraine with 1,900 multiple-warhead nuclear missiles?

Answer 3

Yes.

Question 4

Did Ukraine have its share of USSR nuclear scientists and had the USSR military contained enough Ukrainian nuclear-missile techies that Ukraine would have had no trouble in remaining the world’s THIRD-largest nuclear power – behind the U.S. and Russia BUT AHEAD OF Britain, France, China, etc.?

Answer 4

Yes.

Question 5

However, as a new “world citizen,” did Ukraine signal its willingness to surrender its 1,900 multiple-warhead nuclear missiles and its nuclear-weapons program IF ITS INDEPENDENCE AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY WERE GUARANTEED?

Answer 5

Yes.

Question 6

On 12/5/1994, did President Bill Clinton for the U.S., Prime Minister John Major for the U.K., and President Boris Yeltsin for Russia sign an agreement GUARANTEEING UKRAINE’S INDEPENDENCE AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY if Ukraine would surrender its 1,900 multiple-warhead nuclear missiles and its nuclear-weapons program?

Answer 6

Yes.

Question 7

Did Ukraine immediately do so?

Answer 7

Yes.

Question 8

Do American pols and the mainstream media employ FOUR DISPICABLE STRATEGIES FOR JUSTIFYING STABBING UKRAINE IN THE BACK???

FIRST, falsely claiming that Ukraine wanted to get rid of its nukes because of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident?

SECOND, noting that the 12/5/1994 agreement was NOT a “treaty” requiring a 2/3 ratification vote by the U.S. Senate?

THIRD AND THEIR FAVORITE, simply ignoring the 12/5/1994 Agreement?

FOURTH, salving their consciences by claiming that Ukraine did enjoy some benefits before we STABBED THEM IN THE BACK in 2014 and again this year?

Answer 8

Yes.

Re the fourth strategy, please see the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center March 2020 Report whose Sec. 4 is entitled “Nuclear weapons would likely have become a security liability, not an asset, for Ukraine”!!!

[The HKS Belfer Center report is available for download at viewtopic.php?f=681&t=2165&sid=433b3ed8 ... f849178525.]

Such comments are insufferable!!!

FIRST, they are untrue!!!

SECOND, they are the equivalent of saying while “patting Ukrainians on the head” --

“You were chumps to have ever believed our guarantee, but be satisfied that you got a few crumbs as a result of your stupidity/insanity!!!”

At least the equivalent would not refer to Ukrainians as “Little Brown Brothers” as has been typical of such statements throughout history when dealing, patronizingly, with countries with predominantly people of color!!!

Question 9

Did President Obama Dis-Honor President Clinton’s Solemn 12/5/1994 Agreement in Feb/March 2014 when Russia invaded Ukraine – annexing the Crimean Peninsula and asserting permanent control over the Donbas Region of Eastern Ukraine?

Answer 9

Unfortunately!!!

Question 10

Did President Obama refuse, in effect, to “lift a finger” – providing Ukraine with ONLY NON-LETHAL AID in the form of blankets and pillows???!!!

Answer 10

Absolutely!!!

Question 11

Has President Biden Dis-Honored President Clinton’s Solemn 12/5/1994 Agreement?

Answer 11

Unfortunately!!!

Question 12

At his news conference on 2/16/2022, did President Biden say that a Russian “incursion” into Ukraine would be A-OK???!!!

Answer 12

OMG, yes!!!

Question 13

And had he long-since ruled out any military response to Russia’s build-up of more than 100,000 troops on Ukraine’s borders with the threat of SOLELY economic sanctions if Russia “invades” (vs. has a mere “incursion)???!!!

Answer 13

Incredibly!!!

Question 14

Does Putin appear to be impressed by such sanctions?

Answer 14

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 15

After all, aren’t most of them imposed periodically and then quickly relaxed for no good reason?

Answer 15

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 16

Didn’t Biden seem pitiful when announcing the final sanctions earlier today (Feb 24) following his G-7 Conference as a result of which he could NOT even achieve agreement to take Russia off the SWIFT banking system much less sanction Russian oil & gas since he didn’t want to affect worldwide energy prices (including U.S. gasoline prices)? Did he have to face the reality that Russia is Europe’s largest supplier of oil & gas and if Russia were taken off the SWIFT banking system, Europe would just have to find some other way to pay for Russian oil & gas? Coupled with the minor inconvenience to Russia of paying for its imports with whatever Europe finds to pay for its Russian oil & gas?

Answer 16

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 17

Didn’t Biden seem most-abjectly pitiful during his press conference when he said it would take “a month or so” to ascertain whether his sanctions would have any effect? After all, won’t Russia have long since achieved effective control of Ukraine by that time and be busy “disappearing” any Ukrainians who had opposed them? And won’t the rest of the G-7 be clamoring for the removal of the sanctions by that time because the new status quo can NOT be reversed?

Answer 17

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 18

Isn’t America’s obligation to Ukraine a MUCH HIGHER moral and legal obligation than our NATO obligation – after all, we did NOT dupe any of the NATO countries into surrendering the means to defend themselves AND many (if not most) of the NATO countries do NOT spend 2% of their GDP on defense which is the minimum requirement for receiving our protection.

Answer 18

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!


********************
Part B – Our “Stabbing in the Back” Both Ukraine and Libya Dooming Future Nuclear Non-Proliferation Efforts


Question 1

Is Ukraine the only country we STABBED IN THE BACK after it promised to give up its nuclear-weapons program?

Answer 1

No – please read on.

Question 2

In December 2003, when it had become clear that Abdul Qadeer Khan (“Father of Pakistan’s Bomb”) had provided Libya’s Muammar al-Qaddafi with a nascent nuclear-weapons program, did Qaddifi agree (like Ukraine in 1994 but without any formal agreement) to surrender his program?

Answer 2

Yes.

Question 3

As a result of Qaddafi’s STUPIDITY, did Obama “green light” in 2011 Britain’s and Italy’s program to colonize Libya’s oil industry with a military invasion which would have been impossible without U.S. military support? Did Obama dismember Libya and has it been an Al Qaeda “hot bed” ever since?

Answer 3

Yes and Yes.

Question 4

What was Obama thinking??? Doesn’t “Muammar al-Qaddafi” mean Muammar, Head of the Quaddaf’s, and doesn’t the land under Libya’s largest tribe contain all the oil???!!!

Answer 4

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 5

Did Abdul Qadeer Khan also provide Iran and North Korea with nascent nuclear-weapons programs?

Answer 5

Yes.

Question 6

In the light of how America STABBED IN THE BACK both Ukraine and Libya when they were too stupid to keep their nuclear-weapons programs, did Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Kim Jong-il “keep their nerve” and prove they were NOT INSANE???

Answer 6

Yes.

Question 7

BTW, did news reports of many North Korean nuclear tests record that Iran’s nuclear scientists were prominent observers at the North Korean tests? Even prompting speculation that some of those tests were of Iranian nuclear bombs?

Answer 7

Yes, news reports of many North Korean nuclear tests record that Iran’s nuclear scientists were prominent observers at the North Korean tests.

And yes, you can always find a news article written by a cynic speculating, in this case, that some of those tests were of Iranian nuclear bombs.

Question 8

Was Ayatollah Khamenei shrewd enough to permit Obama to enter into the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal (aka JCPOA) which –

(A) did NOT provide for “anytime anywhere” inspections,

(B) did NOT impede at all Iran’s development of nuclear-capable short-range and inter-continental ballistic missiles (which are typically launched with such slogans painted on their sides as “Death to Israel” and “Death to the Big Satan” aka the United States – BTW, Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has often, even in the wake of the JCPOA, led crowds in chants of “Death to America”), and

(C) did GUARANTEE Iran nuclear weapons by 2030.

Answer 8

Yes.

Question 9

Did Pres. Biden attempt to grovel his way back into the JCPOA without the corrections!!!

Answer 9

Yes.

Question 10

Has he failed to grovel his way back because the only reason Ayatollah Khamenei had permitted Obama to enter into Obama’s face-saving 2015 JCPOA was trade restrictions, the most important of which was cutting Iran’s oil exports by 3 million barrels/day and in order to TRY to control inflation which is largely driven by ballooning world oil prices, hasn’t Biden “green lighted” Iran’s producing oil “flat out”???!!!

Answer 10

Yes.

Question 11

Is it any wonder that Iran’s JCPOA negotiators announced in the wake of that “green lighting” that any and all concessions made to date for permitting Biden to grovel his way back into the JCPOA are now “off the table”???!!!

Answer 11

Of course not!!!

Question 12

And is Biden’s apparent attitude - Israel be damned???!!!

Answer 12

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 13

After all, doesn’t Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei love to proclaim every chance he gets, that Israel is only a “one bomb” state???!!!

Answer 13

Yes.

Question14

And so what if Israel’s current population of 9.5 million exceeds the number of 6 million Jews killed in the World War II “holocaust”???

Answer 14

Yes.


********************
Part C – Appeasement of Putin and Appeasement of Hitler


Question 1

During the 1/24/2022 weekly Zoom chat of the Harvard Law School Class of 1967, did one of our members report having seen a TV “Documentary” about Neville Chamberlain claiming that his appeasement at Munich “bought more time” for the USSR to prepare for war?

Answer 1

Yes.

Question 2

Did I immediately but briefly debunk the “Documentary” by pointing out that Munich produced the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact comprising instead the USSR “buying itself more time” at Britain’s expense?

Answer 2

Yes.

Question 3

Did I follow up with an e-mail to everyone the following day in which I reminded them of my Bona Fides by recounting that I was married for 33 years to the Co-Author of the nation’s best-selling high-school world-history textbook (McGraw Hill with National Geographic Illustrations) and that one of my three simultaneous careers was reading annually in my spare time 12-15 thick history tomes & bios to uncover overlooked nuggets for possible inclusion in the next edition, of which there were six during the 33 years -- that’s 500-600 tomes/bios by the time the gavel went down 21 years ago and since “old dogs don’t learn new tricks” the total today is well over 1,500?

Answer 3

Yes.

Question 4

And re Munich and Molotov-Ribbentrop, did my e-mail recount the following --

Hitler’s annexation of Austria was 3/12/1938.

Chamberlain’s “Peace In Our Time” (sic) Munich Agreement was signed 9/30/1938 allowing Hitler to annex the Czechoslovakian Sudetenland.

In March 1939, Hitler annexed the rest of Czechoslovakia.

On 8/23/1939, a non-aggression pact was signed by Nazi Foreign Minister Ribbentrop and Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov (as in “Molotov Cocktails”).

The Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact also partitioned Poland.

The invasion/partition of Poland began 9/1/1939.

And as they say “the rest is history.”

Britain finally/reluctantly declared war on 9/3/1939 (despite still being unprepared due to Chamberlain’s appeasement policy) following which was the 9-month so-called “Phony War” featuring no military hostilities between Britain and Germany.

The “Phony War” abruptly ended after nine months on 5/10/1940.

Illustrating the historical maxim in the case of Chamberlain and the USSR – “United We Stand, Divided We Fall.”

Most decent historians view Munich as a desperate attempt by Chamberlain to “knife in the back” the USSR hoping Hitler would look East – after all, his speeches and writings often featured the idea of Lebensraum (living space) for the German people by expanding eastward.

It backfired with Molotov-Ribbentrop.

Having secured his rear, Hitler launched his Blitzkrieg against the BeNeLux countries on 5/10/1940 and within 6 weeks France had also surrendered.

And also on 5/10/1940, Churchill succeeded Chamberlain as Prime Minister.

********** End of Events Triggered By Munich **********


Answer 4

Yes.

Question 5

BTW, had our classmate who reported about the Chamberlain “Documentary” served as our Ambassador to Norway?

Answer 5

Yes.

Question 6

So did my e-mail continue with an interesting tidbit involving Churchill and Norway???

Anticipating that he would soon be Prime Minister (despite the attempts of the Appeasement Wing of the Conservative Party to install Lord Halifax as Chamberlain’s successor), Churchill feverishly made plans to invade Norway before Hitler could grab it.

Unfortunately, Hitler invaded Norway 4/9/1940 (32 days before Churchill assumed office) and subjugated it completely by 6/10/1940 before Churchill could organize an opposing military action.

As a result, when Hitler finally invaded the USSR a year later on 6/22/1941, Churchill’s desperate program to keep Stalin in the war with convoys of arms/supplies to Murmansk had to pass along the extensive now-hostile Norwegian coast before turning right in the Arctic Ocean to reach Russian territory on the far side of the Scandinavian countries.

Answer 6

Yes.


********************
Part D – No Excuse For Surprise At Putin’s Barbarity


Question 1

Doesn’t he routinely kill or imprison opponents???

Answer 1

Of course.

Question 2

And haven’t many of these killings occurred in Western countries?

Answer 2

Of course.

Question 3

And isn’t he simply “following in the footsteps” of his predecessor, Joe Stalin, who killed 25 million farmers (many, if not most, of whom were Ukrainians) during his unsuccessful attempt to collectivize farming in the 1930’s?

Answer 3

Of course!!!

Question 4

BTW, didn’t Stalin engage in so many purges (including Russians who were unfortunate enough to be conquered by Hitler) that the title “Great Purge” which is often used by historians, is used by them to describe MANY DIFFERENT PURGES throughout his three-decade reign (1/21/1924-3/5/1953)? And wasn’t “Siberia” as in “banishment” still a fearful adjective for his relative humanitarianism?

Answer 4

Yes and Yes.

Question 5

And isn’t Putin simply “following in the footsteps” of his predecessor, Leonid Brezhnev, who sent in the Soviet military to crush the Hungarian Revolution of 1956?

Answer 5

Of course!!!

Question 6

And isn’t Putin simply “following in the footsteps” of Brezhnev, who sent in the Soviet military to crush the Czechoslovakian Revolution (aka The Prague Spring of 1968)?

Answer 6

Of course!!!

Question 7

Why do American pols and media “wring their hands” and FALSELY proclaim that Putin’s sending in the Soviet military to conquer Ukraine is the worst war in Europe in 70 years (i.e., since World War II)??? Don’t the American intelligence services predict that Putin will crush Ukraine MUCH FASTER than it took the Soviet military to crush the 6/23/1956 – 11/4/1956 Hungarian Revolution – and MUCH FASTER than it took the Soviet military to crush the 1/5/1968 – 8/21/1968 Czechoslovakian Revolution (aka The Prague Spring)???

Answer 7

God Only Knows why American pols and media make such FALSE proclamations!!!

Except that they are so lazy that they usually parrot whatever was said by the first idiot to “run off at the mouth”!!!

And YES, the American intelligence services have predicted that Putin will crush Ukraine MUCH FASTER than it took the Soviet military to crush the 6/23/1956 – 11/4/1956 Hungarian Revolution – and MUCH FASTER than it took the Soviet military to crush the 1/5/1968 – 8/21/1968 Czechoslovakian Revolution (aka The Prague Spring)!!!

Question 8

BTW, doesn’t the “starry-eyed” view of the American foreign-policy “establishment” of Russian leaders as “good” but “misunderstood” parallel its “starry-eyed” view of Iranian leaders???

Answer 8

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 9

After all, if Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1979-1989) was succeeded by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (1989 – present), why would anyone think the next undemocratically-imposed Ayatollah would be any different???

Answer 9

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 10

So why should our “starry-eyed” American foreign-policy “establishment” try to DEFRAUD the American public with a so-called “Iran Nuclear Deal” (aka the 2015 JCPOA) which –

(A) did NOT provide for “anytime anywhere” inspections,

(B) did NOT impede at all Iran’s development of nuclear-capable short-range and inter-continental ballistic missiles (which are typically launched with such slogans painted on their sides as “Death to Israel” and “Death to the Big Satan” aka the United States – BTW, Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has often, even in the wake of the JCPOA, led crowds in chants of “Death to America”), and

(C) did GUARANTEE Iran nuclear weapons by 2030.

Answer 10

Indeed, why would they try to DEFRAUD the American public???

Except that it is “second nature” for them!!!


********************
Part E – What Biden IMHO Should Have Done in Ukraine


It does violence to this topic to break it up into Q’s & A’s.

Accordingly, the following e-mail exchange is reproduced in toto from viewtopic.php?f=681&t=2164&sid=58b7b0c6 ... c461931ff7 --


“President Biden’s “Munich” Appeasement à la Neville Chamberlain’s 9/30/1938 “Munich”
Posted by HLS Classmate » Sat Feb 19, 2022 12:35 pm

---------------------------- Original Message -----------------------------
Subject: President Biden’s “Munich” Appeasement à la Neville Chamberlain’s 9/30/1938 “Munich”
From: HLS Classmate
Date: Fri, February 18, 2022 1:08 pm EST
To: ReadingLiberally-SaltLake@johnkarls.com
Attachment:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John,

I was intrigued by your 1/30/2022 e-mail to “Recent Attendees of RL Meetings” which was the first part of the first so-called “reply” to the Original Proposal.

The title of both your 1/30/2022 e-mail and the first so-called “reply” was “Winston Churchill, Appeasement and The 1994 U.S. Guarantee of Ukraine’s Independence & Territory.”

Your 1/30/2022 e-mail opened with “This is a FIVE-ALARM FIRE!!!” and urged recipients to register their views with President Biden at www.whitehouse.gov/contact, selecting “Contact the President” from the pull-down menu for the first item in the contact form.

Your 1/30/2022 e-mail proceeded to say that you had just done so and that your message to Pres. Biden was –

“Re Ukraine & Taiwan, please provide as much support against Russian & Chinese aggression as possible INCLUDING USE OF OUR MILITARY IF NECESSARY.”

Were you serious about the use of the U.S. military? How would you have envisioned this happening? What did you believe the result would be?

Regards,

HLS Classmate


---------------------------- Original Message -----------------------------
Subject: Re: President Biden’s “Munich” Appeasement à la Neville Chamberlain’s 9/30/1938 “Munich”
From: ReadingLiberally-SaltLake@johnkarls.com
Date: Sat, February 19, 2022 4:41 am MST
To: HLS Classmate
Attachment:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear HLS Classmate,

Thank you for your e-mail.

Since you also taught law school part time, I trust you can appreciate the ramifications of the 12/5/1994 written guarantee of Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity signed by Pres. William J. Clinton for the U.S., Prime Minister John Major for the U.K., and President Boris N. Yeltsin for the Russian Federation – the text of which I posted an hour ago at viewtopic.php?f=680&t=2162&sid=58b7b0c6 ... c461931ff7.

(1) Paragraph (1) provides that Russia, the U.K. and the U.S. “reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine….. to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.”

[NB: The “existing borders” were as of 1994, long before 2014 when Russia stole Crimea from Ukraine and occupied permanently Ukraine’s Donbas region in the east!!!]

(2) Paragraph (2) provides that Russia, the U.K. and the U.S. “reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence [sic – British spelling of “defense”] or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.”

(3) Paragraph (4) provides that Russia, the U.K. and the U.S. “reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

[Paragraphs (3), (5) and (6) do not bear on my following argument.]


**********
Analysis of the Guarantee

FIRST, Russia is once again (as in 2014) violating its Paragraph (1) obligation “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.”

SECOND, Russia is once again (as in 2014) violating its Paragraph (2) “obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.”

[Putin’s claim that he is doing so “in self-defence” [sic – British spelling of “defense”] doesn’t pass “the laugh test”!!! After all, can anyone believe that a non-nuclear power would attack a nuclear power???]

THIRD AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, Paragraph (4) does NOT limit British and American action to “their commitment to seeking United Nations Security Council action”!!!

In other words, they can take whatever additional action they wish in order to honor their guarantee of “the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.”

And indeed, they have been doing so by sending lethal and other aid to Ukraine in recent weeks.


**********
Pres. Biden’s Decision To Rule Out American Military Involvement

It has become difficult to remember that Pres. Biden campaigned for the Presidency as the Great Unifier.

And foreign policy used to be a bi-partisan matter, particularly when national security was involved.

[NB: My argument in the Original Proposal (especially its sub-section labelled “A Tale of Four Nations” about how the treatment by Presidents Biden and Obama of countries that surrender their nuclear weapons (Ukraine and Libya) has convinced Iran and North Korea that they would have to be INSANE to do so).]

I believe it is fair to say that Putin has revived The Cold War with his current threat to invade Ukraine.

And digressing for a moment, you may not be aware that I served in the U.S. Navy 1967-1970 as an Unrestricted Line Officer - Surface (Ensign > Lieutenant (j.g.) > Lieutenant) with a Top-Secret Security Clearance with Cryptographic Access.

Such clearances and access were typical of Naval Commands with nuclear weapons because your Commanding Officer can NOT be awake and in command 24/7.

And if you are standing OOD watches and Communications watches, THERE MIGHT NOT BE ENOUGH TIME TO AWAKEN YOUR C.O. IF THE ORDER COMES IN TO FIRE YOUR NUKES because, after all, you may be reduced to ashes before you can awaken him!!!

Enough already on the digression!!!

How would I have acted in Pres. Biden’s shoes???

When Putin began to threaten Ukraine again, I would immediately have consulted with the U.K. AND WITH CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS!!!

In an attempt to persuade the Brits that they should honor their 1994 guarantee of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by joining us in sending our military to defend Ukraine IF ASKED (which, presumably, Ukraine would want to do).

Meanwhile, as the Great Unifier, I would be willing to bet that Republicans would also support the use of our military in Ukraine in view of the national-security nuclear-proliferation threat and the national-security implications of a “weak kneed” response in Ukraine for China vis-à-vis Taiwan, Iran vis-à-vis belligerence throughout the Middle East, and North Korea’s recent firing/testing of its nuclear-capable missiles.

But what did the Great Unifier do???

He unilaterally announced that no U.S. military would be deployed to Ukraine.

Thereby poisoning any hope of bi-partisan support. After all, he was “painting into a corner” any Republicans who would have been willing to use our military in Ukraine, but did NOT want to be painted as hot-headed trigger-happy militarists!!!

What could the Great Unifier have accomplished???

FIRST, we will never know whether Biden could have persuaded Republicans to honor our guarantee to Ukraine by deploying our military to Ukraine IF ASKED.

SECOND, we will never know whether Biden could have persuaded the Brits to join us by HONORING THEIR GUARANTEE by deploying their military to Ukraine IF ASKED.

[After all, Britain was among the first to join us in Afghanistan following 9/11 when we invoked the NATO Treaty’s famous Article 5 (an attack on any NATO member is an attack on all). NB: I am NOT arguing that the British and American guarantees to Ukraine are a NATO matter – only that for more than a century, Britain and the U.S. have “seen eye to eye” on national-security issues.]

[However, it is true that Biden damaged our relationship with Britain (and other NATO members) who had answered the NATO Article 5 call to send troops to Afghanistan with Biden’s UNILATERAL ABANDONMENT OF THE MISSION WITHOUT EVEN CONSULTING THE NATO MEMBERS WHO HAD ANSWERED OUR NATO ARTICLE 5 CALL TO ACTION!!!]

THIRD, if American troops were sent to Ukraine IF ASKED, Putin would NOT have the gall to start a shooting war with the U.S. [And, presumably, a shooting war with NATO under Article 5 if Putin attacked American troops who were honoring America’s 1994 Guarantee to Ukraine!!!]

FOURTH, the foregoing judgment is the result of having taken Prof. Henry Kissinger’s “Nuclear Diplomacy” seminar while we were in law school and, ever since, having read everything Kissinger ever wrote that became publicly available and analyzed all of his actions as National Security Adviser & Secretary of State during the course of which he engineered the 1972 "Opening to China” which drove a wedge between the Soviet Union and China.

[For more details about my bona fides as a Kissinger disciple on “Nuclear Diplomacy,” please see the voluminous materials comprising the Expired Topic Proposal entitled “Kissinger The Negotiator - Lessons From Dealmaking” relating to the 5/9/2018 NYC Harvard Club presentation by Harvard Law School Prof. Robert Mnookin and Harvard Business School Prof. Jim Sibenius on the then-new book of the same title that they had co-authored with Prof. Nick Burns of the Harvard Kennedy School of Government – which voluminous materials are available at viewtopic.php?f=150&t=1737&sid=f3efac43 ... 1c4ead788b.]


*****
Thank you again for your e-mail.

I know if you have any follow-up questions/comments, you are not shy.

Sincerely,

John K.

[HLS Classmate]

.

---------------------------- Original Message -----------------------------
Subject: Re: President Biden’s “Munich” Appeasement à la Neville Chamberlain’s 9/30/1938 “Munich”
From: HLS Classmate
Date: Thu, February 24, 2022 7:49 pm EST
To: ReadingLiberally-SaltLake@johnkarls.com
Attachment:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John,

I see you incorporated our e-mail exchange of a week ago on the referenced subject ver batim in this month’s short quiz.

What do you make of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (and other Ukrainian officials) saying that they did NOT request American military personnel.

In this regard, it is noted that in your e-mail of a week ago, you twice said – “…..sending our military to defend Ukraine IF ASKED (which, presumably, UKRAINE WOULD WANT TO DO).” [All-caps emphasis added.]

Regards,

HLS Classmate



---------------------------- Original Message -----------------------------
Subject: Re: President Biden’s “Munich” Appeasement à la Neville Chamberlain’s 9/30/1938 “Munich”
From: ReadingLiberally-SaltLake@johnkarls.com
Date: Fri, February 25, 2022 7:02 am MST
To: HLS Classmate
Attachment:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear HLS Classmate,

Thank you for your e-mail.

I assume you have posed a rhetorical question whose obvious answer you would like to post on our website.

Obviously, the American government made clear to President Zelenskyy and his colleagues that if they said publicly that they had requested American military personnel (which, presumably, they did), there “would be hell to pay.”

After all, they have been unable to pry out of the Biden Administration as many anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons as they need!!! And they couldn’t risk NOT receiving the trickle that had been occurring!!!

Thank you again for your e-mail.

Sincerely,

John K.