In the years after the Russian army rolled into Ukraine in 2014, the British minister in charge of fielding requests from Kyiv for military assistance was the defence secretary, Michael Fallon. He was the man who reluctantly kept having to say “no”. Fallon now looks back on that time with bitter regret. “I and the ministry wanted to do more,” he recalls. “We were stymied and we were blocked in cabinet from sending the Ukrainians the arms they needed.”
In public David Cameron, the prime minister, insisted that the Ukraine crisis could be solved only by diplomacy — and therefore it was unnecessary to provide arms to the country. This was because, according to Fallon, those at the top of government feared that arming Ukraine would draw Putin’s ire.
“Some in the cabinet felt extremely strongly that we should do nothing to further provoke Russia,” Fallon said. “I felt that was absurd. The Russians didn’t need any provoking. They were already there, sending people across the border.
It’s not a UK-exclusive issue, it’s the fallacy of the West for years:
The politicians bury their head in the sand and try to convinve themselves that “there’s no way Russia chooses war, it’s a lose-lose for everyone, why would they harm their economy for some land?”. It’s one of the main reasons they thought that if they appease, the agressor will take something and stand down.
They fail to accept/understand that Russia (and not only Russia) is stuck in the past, and hasn’t embraced the mentality that the end goal of all actions is economic prosperity…
Should have spent 7 years manufacturing their own. Not very good planning.
3 comments
In the years after the Russian army rolled into Ukraine in 2014, the British minister in charge of fielding requests from Kyiv for military assistance was the defence secretary, Michael Fallon. He was the man who reluctantly kept having to say “no”. Fallon now looks back on that time with bitter regret. “I and the ministry wanted to do more,” he recalls. “We were stymied and we were blocked in cabinet from sending the Ukrainians the arms they needed.”
In public David Cameron, the prime minister, insisted that the Ukraine crisis could be solved only by diplomacy — and therefore it was unnecessary to provide arms to the country. This was because, according to Fallon, those at the top of government feared that arming Ukraine would draw Putin’s ire.
“Some in the cabinet felt extremely strongly that we should do nothing to further provoke Russia,” Fallon said. “I felt that was absurd. The Russians didn’t need any provoking. They were already there, sending people across the border.
It’s not a UK-exclusive issue, it’s the fallacy of the West for years:
The politicians bury their head in the sand and try to convinve themselves that “there’s no way Russia chooses war, it’s a lose-lose for everyone, why would they harm their economy for some land?”. It’s one of the main reasons they thought that if they appease, the agressor will take something and stand down.
They fail to accept/understand that Russia (and not only Russia) is stuck in the past, and hasn’t embraced the mentality that the end goal of all actions is economic prosperity…
Should have spent 7 years manufacturing their own. Not very good planning.