This conference was obviously self-selecting, but it was hardly devoid of discussion of: the Zelensky government's declining popularity, his major cabinet shuffle, endemic corruption and at least arguable strategic and tactical blunders. I got the impression some of the moderators were more nervous about asking these questions than officials were about fielding them. Gillian Tett, the Financial Times columnist, whom I don't know, was fearless and asked about just about everything I mentioned here.
I suspect my Globe colleague Mark MacKinnon would be astonished to hear I went all the way over there just to cover a meeting. To my mind he's the best of several Canadian journalists who got there way ahead of me. Here's one of his best pieces:
Great piece Paul. I am struck by how much the West, and its current coterie of leaders have forgotten the history and lessons of pre-1939 in their/our collective let’s play defense and hope for a draw policy stance. There is no deterrence or bigger picture end game on offer IMO, western lethargy on “kit” for Ukraine assures Russian victory. Putin is content to posture and threaten… he is staring down the west, effectively and time is his best ally.
As Canadian of Ukrainian ancestry, my husband and I have been concerned since this war started, that the west would lose heart and pay lip service to their support. Ukraine needs weapons that it can use as it determines and probably the support of western armies. You can't destroy an enemy with 10 times the number of soldier and paid recruits with sticks and stones. Thanks for telling it as it is.
Thank you very much for your continued interest and attention in what is going on in Eastern Europe, not just Ukraine. It’s great to hear from someone who was on the ground and not just opining from afar.
The west’s politics can often lack principle, conviction and courage. PM Boris Johnson had these in spades on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It’s a shame his tenure was short-lived for this reason alone.
Best I can tell - from work with Pacific allies, to his leadership on Ukraine and management of Gaza, Joe Biden became the world order. His legacy will include a Europe quite different from pre-conflict times. More unified. Nippon Steel notwithstanding, Japan is changed for generations to come. Xi is managed. Jihadists and their sponsors have seen their goal of a wider conflict fail. He’ll be a hard act to follow.
Many thanks for this trip, it's great to see one's journalism spending directly affecting coverage quality!
On the subject of weapons handovers, there's a topic that's politely elided; I haven't seen Zelenskyy asked why he's sacked various generals. It's corruption, of course. Russia lost those first few days, and maybe will the war, because their generals are corrupt and sell off the spare parts, didn't rotate the tires, even, and their convoy broke down.
While the USA was saying they couldn't hand over weapons until all the soldiers were trained in their complex use, they were also afraid of fancy smart missiles heading out the back door, the proceeds to some general's pocket. (And if they get away with it, non-corrupt generals *see* that and start trying it.)
Distinguished journalist Andrew Cockburn has a substack, very much on this file. His book, "The Spoils of War" is required reading about America's own military purchasing scandals.
Harris can get elected, at this point, without a firm position on any controversy except abortion, so she won't take one; but she has no known geopolitical ambitions of her own, and would inherit Biden's staff, she'll likely just follow.
Whereas Trump is sending every signal that he would happily hand Putin not just the Donbas and Crimea, but Kyiv. That's what the Harris campaign should be saying plainly, they should go to Trump's own language to embarrass him before his base: "Putin is pouring lies and filth into America to elect his man, Donald Trump, who will hand him the whole of Ukraine."
WWIII started in 2014 with Russia's invasion of Crimea Ukraine. This war is a cross between WWII and the Cold War. It has Russia, Iran and China vs. most of the world and is characterized by local conflicts with global consequences (Ukraine, Gaza) and media manipulation.
Just how serious is Putin’s threat of escalation beyond Ukraine, if strikes on Russian soil are eventually authorized? What are the best assumptions? Having just finished reading “Nuclear War, A Scenario” (Annie Jacobsen), I can’t believe that any world leader, sane or otherwise, would entertain the thought of scaling up to nukes… M. A. D.
It’s time we — admittedly from our safe Canadian perch — call out Joe Biden, that the longer he holds off, the more Ukrainian blood he has on his hands.
I was a bit surprised to learn that Justin Trudeau has been saying he has no problem with strikes against targets in Russia. Although as the person who pointed this out to me added, Canada has no missile strike capability that would make this more than an abstract preference. Still I was surprised.
I should also point out the Ukrainians have been testing their own missiles. They have some history on this: Soviet ICBMs were as much Ukrainian tech as anything else. But I have a hard time imagining Ukraine could make the things in any quantity in the short term.
Reading this article I started fantasizing about Trudeau crashing the conference to give Putin an ultimatum and pledging to join Ukraine in a full scale war to take out the Russian threat, under the premise of forcing Western Allies into being more pro-active.
The sub-text of that move is that he's currently far beyond salvaging his position and legacy in Parliament, therefore if he can't be the hero anymore, he can roleplay the villain for a bit. Of course it would all be for show; only managing to tilt the narrative both on the war and in Parliament, because I can't imagine any motion of the sort passing in our current minority government.
Agreed all. I was surprised myself to learn recently that the new River-class destroyers being built are supposed to have significant long-range strike capability of Tomahawk cruise missiles (~500km range).
What is missing from the West’s declarations of support for Ukraine is a clear statement that we want Ukraine to win. Right now our support seems predicated on not wanting Ukraine to lose. As Paul Wells states, that leaves initiative with Putin who is willing to see untold numbers of Russian men butchered to achieve a victory.
If we say we want Ukraine to win, it logically follows that we give them the means to do so. It also means refusing to be intimidated by Putin’s nuke rattling. He knows if he ever resorts to nuclear weapons, it will be over for him. (I use the term “the West” and “we” in full knowledge that it includes Canada which does not even equip its own military and, sadly, can offer little to Ukraine beyond cheap talk.)
This conference was obviously self-selecting, but it was hardly devoid of discussion of: the Zelensky government's declining popularity, his major cabinet shuffle, endemic corruption and at least arguable strategic and tactical blunders. I got the impression some of the moderators were more nervous about asking these questions than officials were about fielding them. Gillian Tett, the Financial Times columnist, whom I don't know, was fearless and asked about just about everything I mentioned here.
Thank you for the outstanding coverage of this event, which I have yet to find in the North American media.
I suspect my Globe colleague Mark MacKinnon would be astonished to hear I went all the way over there just to cover a meeting. To my mind he's the best of several Canadian journalists who got there way ahead of me. Here's one of his best pieces:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-the-fearless-ukraine-soldiers-front-lines/
But I think I got some useful stuff out of my short trip. Thanks for your kind words.
Great piece Paul. I am struck by how much the West, and its current coterie of leaders have forgotten the history and lessons of pre-1939 in their/our collective let’s play defense and hope for a draw policy stance. There is no deterrence or bigger picture end game on offer IMO, western lethargy on “kit” for Ukraine assures Russian victory. Putin is content to posture and threaten… he is staring down the west, effectively and time is his best ally.
As Canadian of Ukrainian ancestry, my husband and I have been concerned since this war started, that the west would lose heart and pay lip service to their support. Ukraine needs weapons that it can use as it determines and probably the support of western armies. You can't destroy an enemy with 10 times the number of soldier and paid recruits with sticks and stones. Thanks for telling it as it is.
Marilyn Dolenko
" I think I got some usefull stuff out of this short trip".
.You said a mouthfull there Paul. This is why we support you , thank you !
Thank you for making this trip and for the excellent coverage and insights Paul.
Thank you very much for your continued interest and attention in what is going on in Eastern Europe, not just Ukraine. It’s great to hear from someone who was on the ground and not just opining from afar.
The west’s politics can often lack principle, conviction and courage. PM Boris Johnson had these in spades on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It’s a shame his tenure was short-lived for this reason alone.
Well done. Great insights.
Best I can tell - from work with Pacific allies, to his leadership on Ukraine and management of Gaza, Joe Biden became the world order. His legacy will include a Europe quite different from pre-conflict times. More unified. Nippon Steel notwithstanding, Japan is changed for generations to come. Xi is managed. Jihadists and their sponsors have seen their goal of a wider conflict fail. He’ll be a hard act to follow.
Many thanks for this trip, it's great to see one's journalism spending directly affecting coverage quality!
On the subject of weapons handovers, there's a topic that's politely elided; I haven't seen Zelenskyy asked why he's sacked various generals. It's corruption, of course. Russia lost those first few days, and maybe will the war, because their generals are corrupt and sell off the spare parts, didn't rotate the tires, even, and their convoy broke down.
While the USA was saying they couldn't hand over weapons until all the soldiers were trained in their complex use, they were also afraid of fancy smart missiles heading out the back door, the proceeds to some general's pocket. (And if they get away with it, non-corrupt generals *see* that and start trying it.)
Distinguished journalist Andrew Cockburn has a substack, very much on this file. His book, "The Spoils of War" is required reading about America's own military purchasing scandals.
Harris can get elected, at this point, without a firm position on any controversy except abortion, so she won't take one; but she has no known geopolitical ambitions of her own, and would inherit Biden's staff, she'll likely just follow.
Whereas Trump is sending every signal that he would happily hand Putin not just the Donbas and Crimea, but Kyiv. That's what the Harris campaign should be saying plainly, they should go to Trump's own language to embarrass him before his base: "Putin is pouring lies and filth into America to elect his man, Donald Trump, who will hand him the whole of Ukraine."
...make him *deny* it.
WWIII started in 2014 with Russia's invasion of Crimea Ukraine. This war is a cross between WWII and the Cold War. It has Russia, Iran and China vs. most of the world and is characterized by local conflicts with global consequences (Ukraine, Gaza) and media manipulation.
Just how serious is Putin’s threat of escalation beyond Ukraine, if strikes on Russian soil are eventually authorized? What are the best assumptions? Having just finished reading “Nuclear War, A Scenario” (Annie Jacobsen), I can’t believe that any world leader, sane or otherwise, would entertain the thought of scaling up to nukes… M. A. D.
Refreshing to hear reporting from this war from you.... one of the last of the proper reporters
It’s time we — admittedly from our safe Canadian perch — call out Joe Biden, that the longer he holds off, the more Ukrainian blood he has on his hands.
I was a bit surprised to learn that Justin Trudeau has been saying he has no problem with strikes against targets in Russia. Although as the person who pointed this out to me added, Canada has no missile strike capability that would make this more than an abstract preference. Still I was surprised.
I should also point out the Ukrainians have been testing their own missiles. They have some history on this: Soviet ICBMs were as much Ukrainian tech as anything else. But I have a hard time imagining Ukraine could make the things in any quantity in the short term.
Reading this article I started fantasizing about Trudeau crashing the conference to give Putin an ultimatum and pledging to join Ukraine in a full scale war to take out the Russian threat, under the premise of forcing Western Allies into being more pro-active.
The sub-text of that move is that he's currently far beyond salvaging his position and legacy in Parliament, therefore if he can't be the hero anymore, he can roleplay the villain for a bit. Of course it would all be for show; only managing to tilt the narrative both on the war and in Parliament, because I can't imagine any motion of the sort passing in our current minority government.
Agreed all. I was surprised myself to learn recently that the new River-class destroyers being built are supposed to have significant long-range strike capability of Tomahawk cruise missiles (~500km range).
What is missing from the West’s declarations of support for Ukraine is a clear statement that we want Ukraine to win. Right now our support seems predicated on not wanting Ukraine to lose. As Paul Wells states, that leaves initiative with Putin who is willing to see untold numbers of Russian men butchered to achieve a victory.
If we say we want Ukraine to win, it logically follows that we give them the means to do so. It also means refusing to be intimidated by Putin’s nuke rattling. He knows if he ever resorts to nuclear weapons, it will be over for him. (I use the term “the West” and “we” in full knowledge that it includes Canada which does not even equip its own military and, sadly, can offer little to Ukraine beyond cheap talk.)
Thank you for this well written piece and your coverage of it all. I wonder who from Canada was present in terms of Officials? Anyone?