"Why Surrendering Donbas & Crimea Is Bad" for Beginners
Let's put this in easy to understand terms
Let’s propose a scenario. Don’t get caught up in the absurdity of the scenario. Just follow along.
Let’s say that the Mexican drug cartels all become one mega cartel, and then they took over the Mexican government wholesale. After taking over Mexico, they offer incentives for locals to have more children and push for massive immigration into the country, increasing it from its current estimated population of 130 million to a population of 1.19 billion, or three and a half times the current US population.
With this growth into an international powerhouse, Mexico begins to exert its influence on the US, dictating what international alliances they can and can’t join. They also fund politicians who push for demanding Spanish be taught alongside English in all schools, as well as more extreme politicians who want the US to join Mexico outright & to abolish any trace of culture that isn’t Mexican.
A populist US president who answers to Mexico City begins to construct a trade & diplomatic agreement with Canada & the Scandinavian nations. His masters tell him to scrap the deal, so he does and instead joins an alliance of Mexico, Guatemala, and Honduras, which doesn’t carry as much juice.
The people really wanted that deal with Canada & company, so they protest. The populist president cracks down, sics riot police on the protests, kidnaps them, murders them. He tells the police to do whatever they want. Counter-protestors on the government dole jump in, attempting to beat the protestors into submission.
Finally, after three months, the protestors decide they’ve had enough. They push back, hard. POTUS decides he’s no longer safe, so he jumps on a private jet to Mexico City & abdicates.
A month later, men in non-descript red uniforms materialize along the southern US border. They manage to take the stretches of land from San Diego to El Paso. “Referendums” are held, seceding from the US and becoming the autonomous Chicano People’s Republic, citing oppression of Spanish-speaking people in this region. Attempts in Los Angeles, Phoenix, Albuquerque, and parts of central Texas to join the CPR are squashed.
The CPR are only recognized by Mexico, Guatemala, and Honduras. The rest of the world recognizes this as de facto US territory.
Over eight years, the US & Mexico sign a number of cease fire treaties arranged by the UN. Mexico violates every single one.
Finally, Mexico decides to go for the gusto and launches a full-scale invasion of the United States. They intend to steamroll their way to DC in a week, but the US pushes them back. Attrition warfare sets in. Canada & its allies offer just enough support to keep the US afloat, but not enough to actually win. Mexico continues to fight, bringing in conscripts from all over the world and emptying its prisons to avoid drafting its middle class, which would prove wildly unpopular. They engage in heinous war crimes, torturing, raping, and murdering American civilians (both in the occupied territories and deeper in US-controlled territory) simply because they can.
Then, Mexico helps a party friendly to its interests to a majority in the Canadian parliament, with the understanding that the Prime Minister will be someone they’ve hand-picked. This new Canadian PM starts feeding Mexico intel on US operations, suspends aid shipments to the US, and demands the US give up the CPR territory. The US insists that to do so would just give Mexico a springboard to launch a second invasion once they’ve replenished arms and personnel.
Would you say that the US has no interest in pursuing peace? Or would you say that “CPR” land was illegally annexed by Mexico and they have no right to it?
This scenario is ridiculous by design. The cartels are not going to take over Mexico in the fashion described. Mexico isn’t going to rival India’s and China’s population overnight, is not going to become a global military power, and is not going to invade the United States.
I used Mexico because that is one of MAGA’s big boogeymen. The thought of a narco-state annexing the southwestern US has been a popular trope in speculative thriller fiction (including some of my favorite books) and in political discussion.
However, the actual play-by-play of the scenario?
Replace “Mexico” with “russia”, “the US” with “Ukraine”, and “Canada” with “the US”, and that is exactly what has happened from 2014 to the present day.
So, ask yourself this: if you played along in good faith, found yourself horrified by the thought of your homeland being taken over by a narco-state, and concluded, “The US in the scenario should absolutely fight to reclaim its land, despite being outnumbered and outgunned…”
…why aren’t you supporting Ukraine when that is actually happening to them?
Never mind that the russians have been doing this for hundreds of years. Whether through the czars, the Soviets, or the oligarchy, the russians have made it a personal mission to exterminate Ukraine & Ukrainian identity.
But set that aside and focus on just the 11-year period from 2014 to now.
If you found yourself ideologically consistent and said the defenders in both scenarios should surrender land for peace? Well, points for consistency and honesty, though you would be better served reading about a little conflict that spanned the 1930s & 1940s.
However, if you found yourself rooting for the US in this scenario but cheering on russia in real life, it would behoove you to do some introspection as to why you possess this dissonance. Do better, be better.
Слава Україні, Героям слава.