Henry Gunther was killed at 10:59 a.m. on Nov. 11, 1918, the last fatality of World War I. The former bank clerk from Baltimore was charging a German machine-gun emplacement in eastern France, possibly because he wanted to redeem himself after being reduced in rank from sergeant to private.
There had been heavy fighting throughout that morning, especially around the Belgian town of Mons, a strategic coalmining center liberated in the closing hours of the war by Canadian troops at a cost of 280 casualties. The last of them was Pvt. George Price, who died from a bullet in the chest at 10:58 a.m., two minutes before the Armistice came into effect.
A lot of frenetic activity happens in the final moments of a war, as each side seeks to strengthen its position in advance of the negotiations. It is happening as I write in Kursk, Ukraine’s toehold in Russia. Since Ukraine’s surprise offensive in August, Russia has recaptured around half its territory, leaving Ukraine holding perhaps 200 square miles. That sliver is all that Ukraine has left to bargain with when the talks begin on the final borders.
Unsurprisingly, Russia is desperate to snatch that bargaining chip away. It has mustered 50,000 troops for a Kursk counteroffensive, reportedly including soldiers from North Korea. Equally unsurprisingly, Ukraine is determined to cling on, taking advantage of its newly granted permission to use long-range missiles on Russian soil by hitting supply depots and disrupting enemy logistics. Russia has responded to these strikes by using intercontinental ballistic missiles against Ukraine for the first time.
Both the Russian and Ukrainian leaders have been in contact with President-elect Donald Trump. While we can only speculate about what exactly passed between them, both have come away with the message that the war is in its final phase. Hence the last-minute scramble for every disputed clod of mud before Trump’s inauguration.
Trump’s influence here is asymmetric. It is Ukraine, not Russia, that is under pressure. Never mind the Donald’s bizarre fawning over Russian President Vladimir Putin. Ignore the rumors that the Russian leader has kompromat on him. Even if Trump were a second Reagan, he would necessarily have more sway over the country that depends on American weapons than the one that doesn’t.
Might Europe step up instead? Russia’s economy is about the size of Spain’s or Mexico’s, 11% that of the European Union. For Europe to pick up America’s share of the tab would require only a 1% increase in its collective public spending. Yet, flabby and enervated after years of dependence on the American military guarantee, the nations of Europe seem unable to rouse themselves. Only Britain, Poland, and the Baltic states have been prepared to back Ukraine militarily throughout and to raise their defense budgets accordingly. And, on their own, they cannot tip the balance.
So, barring a miracle, it is over. Russia will get to keep the Donbas and Crimea, and probably also some kind of land connection between the two. Plenty of Trump supporters will pat themselves on the back and move on. Trade can flow again, and soldiers can be released back into productive work. Where’s the problem?
The problem is that Putin will have defeated a Western ally. With all its resources, NATO will have failed to protect a friendly state against a rogue regime. The loss of American authority and prestige will be felt all over the world. If Venezuela takes it into its head to attack Guyana or Syria to attack Israel, who is to stop them? If China decides that this is the moment to absorb Taiwan, who will stand in its way?
Perhaps the MAGA troops are sanguine about such things. Why should the United States involve itself in foreign wars? Who cares if one lot of Chinese are killing another lot?
These were precisely the arguments of the original America First movement, the noninterventionist campaign backed by Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh. They were false then, too. The United States ended up being attacked.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
World War II, like the Cold War, was a struggle between authoritarianism and liberty. That struggle did not end in 1990. For a while, it looked like our side was winning as country after country moved toward representative government and the rule of law. But, since 2012, the trend has been the other way.
The struggle is now being played out in the cold steppes around Kursk. America can, of course, walk away from it. But it cannot walk away from the consequences of walking away.
This article was originally published at www.washingtonexaminer.com
