Lessons from Munich
in facing aggression
An assessment of the war in Ukraine and its implications for global stability
By Andrew Burlone
November 24, 2024
The Munich Agreement, signed on September 30, 1938, marked a pivotal moment in history, reshaping the security dynamics of Europe. At that time, Britain, France, Germany, and Italy allowed Nazi Germany to annex the Sudetenland in exchange for Hitler’s promise of peace. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain returned from the negotiations with a sense of triumph, but this optimism quickly dissipated. Within months, Hitler brazenly violated the agreement by occupying the rest of Czechoslovakia, plunging Europe into the turmoil of the Second World War.
The current situation in Ukraine carries significant implications for the future of Europe and the United States. Donald Trump has expressed a desire to impose cease-fire negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, suggesting that he could broker a deal that may require Ukraine to make territorial concessions in exchange for peace. As nations deliberate their responses to the current geopolitical challenge, the echoes of Munich highlight the vital importance of standing resolute against tyranny and remaining vigilant in the defence of international norms and collective security.
The echoes of Munich highlight the vital importance of standing resolute against tyranny and remaining vigilant in the defence of international norms and collective security.
Today, as we observe Russia’s aggression towards Ukraine, the parallels to 1938 are deeply concerning. The international community once again faces the dilemma of whether to confront expansionist ambitions directly or risk further conflict through appeasement. The lessons of Munich serve as a sobering reminder that diplomatic compromises in the face of territorial aggression may only delay, rather than prevent, broader conflicts.
The ongoing war in Ukraine resonates with echoes of past European conflicts, revealing the cyclical nature of history. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, the conflict has transformed into a protracted struggle, evoking memories of various 20th-century wars. The trench warfare in Bakhmut recalls World War I’s Battle of the Somme, while aspects of the conflict echo the Soviet Union’s Winter War against Finland and the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia.
The war in Ukraine has reignited Cold War tensions, revitalized NATO, and prompted a reassessment of European security. However, while these historical comparisons provide valuable context, they also risk oversimplification. The war in Ukraine is distinctly modern, characterized by advanced warfare technologies, complex international alliances, and the looming threat of nuclear escalation. As the conflict persists, it serves as a stark reminder of the enduring challenges to peace and stability in Europe, uniting much of the global community against Russian aggression while simultaneously testing the resolve of Western alliances.
Current Situation in Ukraine
The situation in Ukraine reflects a remarkable resilience from both its military and civilian populations in the face of the ongoing Russian invasion. Since February 2022, Ukrainians have demonstrated an unwavering determination to defend their homeland, with soldiers and civilians mobilizing to support the war effort. This spirit of resistance has been bolstered by substantial international aid, particularly from Western nations such as the United States and members of the European Union.
This assistance has enabled the Ukrainian government to sustain operations and provide essential services, including advanced weaponry, financial resources, and humanitarian aid aimed at reducing the suffering caused by the conflict. As Ukraine continues its fight for sovereignty and territorial integrity, the combined efforts of its citizens and international allies underscore a profound commitment to freedom and democracy in the face of aggression.
This Ukrainian resilience is rooted in a combination of factors, including decentralized governance, the sustainability of societal networks, a reliable information policy, and strong public adherence to the idea of a just war. Moreover, Ukrainian civil society has played a crucial role, with NGOs and volunteer networks providing vital humanitarian aid in war-affected cities
‘Ukrainians have demonstrated an unwavering determination to defend their homeland, a spirit of resistance bolstered by substantial international aid.’
Russia’s military strategy has undergone significant evolution throughout the ongoing conflict, increasingly focusing on attrition and applying pressure along the front lines. The Kremlin’s objective is to exhaust Ukrainian forces while simultaneously undermining international support for Ukraine. This approach involves executing smaller tactical assaults designed to inflict consistent losses on Ukrainian troops and stretch their resources thin, alongside threats of nuclear confrontation with NATO.
However, the commitment of NATO and other allies to support Ukraine presents a potential shift in this dynamic. Should Ukraine receive sufficient resources and training, it could initiate effective counteroffensives that disrupt Russian plans and reclaim lost territory. Ultimately, the outcome of the conflict will hinge not only on the strategies employed by both sides but also on the determination of Ukraine’s international partners to remain steadfast against aggression and support a just resolution.
Repercussions on Europe
The ongoing war in Ukraine has far-reaching implications for European security and political dynamics. It has reignited fears of Russian expansionism, prompting European nations to reassess their defence policies and military preparedness in light of this resurgent threat. As a result, there has been a noticeable shift towards greater political unity within the European Union, with member states increasingly recognizing the need for cohesive strategies to counter potential aggression.
This newfound solidarity is evident in increased military collaboration and a shared commitment to strengthening defence capabilities. Many European nations are advocating for a more robust alliance to deter further Russian incursions while considering broader regional security implications. As Europe confronts these challenges, the necessity for a unified defence approach has never been more critical, underscoring the interconnectedness of national interests in an increasingly volatile geopolitical landscape.
‘Europe must consider the long-term implications for its economic security and strategic autonomy in an increasingly unpredictable global landscape.’
However, the rise of far-right parties in some European countries, fueled by economic hardships stemming from the Ukraine conflict, poses a significant threat to European unity. These parties often prioritize nationalist agendas over collective security, expressing reluctance to support Ukraine’s war effort. The cost-of-living crisis, driven by surging energy prices and inflation, has created fertile ground for extreme-right ideologies to gain traction. If such parties gain power and refuse to contribute to Ukraine’s military and humanitarian needs, it could fracture the EU’s cohesion, undermining its ability to present a united front against external threats and potentially emboldening adversaries like Russia.
This potential political shift not only jeopardizes support for Ukraine but also threatens broader efforts to maintain stability and security across Europe. Increased defence spending has become a priority, potentially diverting resources from other public investments. Additionally, the financial sector faces challenges as banks adopt a more cautious approach, which could lead to tighter credit conditions for struggling businesses. These economic pressures vary across EU member states, necessitating a coordinated response to maintain unity and support the most affected regions.
Significance for the United States
The war in Ukraine has significantly reshaped U.S. foreign policy under President Biden, prompting a renewed focus on Europe and a reevaluation of relations with Russia. As the conflict escalated, the United States shifted from a cautious stance to a more assertive approach, emphasizing military support for Ukraine and reinforcing commitments to NATO allies. This shift reflects a broader understanding that Europe’s stability is crucial not only for regional security but also for maintaining U.S. credibility on the global stage.
The changing political landscapes in the U.S. and Europe have further complicated transatlantic relations, as leaders grapple with the implications of ongoing support for Ukraine while facing domestic pressures and shifting public opinions regarding military involvement abroad. Additionally, the war in Ukraine has heightened China’s challenge to U.S. hegemony, as Beijing seeks to expand its influence and build a sphere of interests that counters American dominance, potentially reshaping global power dynamics.
‘The uncertainty surrounding U.S. commitments highlights the need for Europe to bolster its defence capabilities and take greater responsibility for its security.’
With the recent changes in U.S. leadership and Donald Trump’s return to power, European allies must prepare for a different kind of engagement that may prioritize negotiations over military support. Trump’s preference for bilateral agreements over multilateral cooperation may lead to fragmentation within NATO, as individual countries rush to secure their interests. If U.S. leadership in NATO wanes, European nations may be compelled to rapidly increase their military spending and coordination, which could strain their economies and political cohesion.
Additionally, Trump’s skepticism towards NATO and his admiration for Vladimir Putin present serious challenges to the Western alliance. His hesitance to support NATO allies that do not meet the 2% GDP defence spending target could weaken the alliance’s collective security, potentially creating a power vacuum that hostile nations might exploit.
The lessons of 1938
As the conflict continues, it will be essential for Ukraine and its allies to navigate these shifting dynamics carefully, ensuring that diplomatic efforts do not compromise Ukraine’s sovereignty or long-term aspirations for stability and security in the region. The “Munich moment” analogy serves as a caution against repeating the mistakes of the past, challenging policymakers to consider whether concessions to Russia might embolden further aggression, as appeasement did with Nazi Germany.
The lessons of 1938 offer a stark warning: diplomatic compromise in the face of clear territorial aggression does not prevent conflict but often merely postpones and potentially enlarges it. As nations contemplate their responses to Russian actions, the ghosts of Munich whisper a timeless warning—that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance and that appeasement is rarely a path to lasting peace.
The steadfast resolve of the Ukrainian military and civilian population highlights their commitment to defending sovereignty. Still, this determination requires ongoing international support to enhance military capabilities and ensure economic stability. NATO’s involvement will be crucial, as continued military aid and strategic partnerships can strengthen Ukraine’s ability to counter Russian advances and potentially shift the balance of power.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of WestmountMag.ca or its publishers.
Featured image: FlyD –Unsplash (modified)
Andrew Burlone, co-founder of WestmountMag.ca, began his media journey at NOUS magazine. Subsequently, he launched Visionnaires, holding the position of creative director for over 30 years. Andrew is passionate about history, cinema and photography and also has a keen interest in visual arts and architecture.
We seem to forget that it wasn’t Russia that started the war. With the help of the U.S. in 2014, the democratically elected Ukrainian government was over thrown and replaced by the present Neo Nazi regime which shelled the eastern Donbas (ethnically Russian) for eight years, killing over 15,000 civilians. Russia then entered what was to become a U.S. proxy war with the U.S. intent to weaken Russia. Nato’s promise not to expand east was broken, the Minsk Accords were broken as was the signed Istanbul Treaty. Trust evaporated.
Ukraine is known as one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Much of the foreign military equipment & money is unaccounted for. Vladamir Zelensky has banned all opposition political parties, most of the media, the Russian language and finally the elections which were to have taken place last May!
Fast foreword – Many, many thousands have died for a war that is lost. In the meantime war mongers in other countries are urging Ukrainians to continue. Men young and old are being picked off of the streets and thrown into the meat grinder – a one way trip to the morgue.
The world is weary of the war, including most Ukrainians, as recently expressed by The Economist and other outlets. The U.S Carpet baggers are already salivating over the abundant spoils – minerals etc. The war must stop now!
Concerning your comment about the war in Ukraine, a factual opinion requires examining the historical context, the nature of the conflict, and the actions of both Russia and Ukraine. The Kremlin exerts tight control over media narratives within Russia and uses state-sponsored outlets to disseminate false information globally, making it difficult for some to access unbiased information about the conflict.
Historical Context of the Conflict
The conflict can be traced back to Russia’s annexation of Crimea in March 2014, which was widely condemned as a violation of international law. This act was a significant escalation and is often viewed as the starting point of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, leading to further military engagement in Eastern Ukraine. Following the annexation of Crimea, Russia provided military support to separatist movements in Eastern Ukraine, particularly in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. This support included weapons, training, and even direct military intervention, which has been documented by various international organizations. The narrative surrounding Russian support for separatists in Ukraine is heavily influenced by Russian disinformation tactics aimed at justifying its actions and undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Civilian Casualties
While it is reported that over 15,000 civilians have died in the conflict since 2014, attributing all these casualties solely to Ukrainian actions overlooks the extensive shelling and military operations conducted by Russian-backed separatists and Russian forces themselves. The United Nations has documented numerous instances of civilian casualties resulting from these actions. The situation is complex and involves multiple actors with varying degrees of responsibility for civilian harm.
Corruption Allegations
Ukraine has made significant strides in its anti-corruption efforts, especially since the 2014 Maidan Revolution of Dignity, as recognized by organizations like Transparency International. The country has improved its ranking on the Corruption Perceptions Index, demonstrating its commitment to reform and governance despite the war. Russian disinformation often ignores these achievements, focusing instead on isolated incidents to perpetuate a narrative of widespread corruption, seeking to paint a picture of Ukraine as hopelessly corrupt to discredit its leadership and justify Russia’s military actions.
U.S. Oversight
Concerns about corruption in Ukraine have led U.S. lawmakers to call for greater oversight of military aid provided to Ukraine. However, there is no evidence suggesting that U.S. support is primarily aimed at exploiting Ukraine’s resources or prolonging the war for profit. This oversight is not indicative of exploitation or profit motives but rather reflects a commitment to transparency and accountability. By framing these oversight measures as evidence of corruption, Russian disinformation attempts to sow distrust in Western support for Ukraine.
War Fatigue and Ukrainian Resolve:
While some reports suggest war fatigue among Ukrainians, surveys indicate that a significant portion of the population supports continuing resistance against Russian aggression. Recruitment for voluntary military service in Ukraine has surged, reportedly increasing by 3.5 times over the past two months. The framing of Ukrainians being “picked off the streets” misrepresents the voluntary nature of military service amidst a national crisis. Although there are challenges related to recruitment, such as Russia’s demographic advantage and issues with conscription, these do not overshadow the commitment shown by those who willingly join the military. Contrary to Russia, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry continues to promote voluntary enlistment as a viable option for addressing personnel shortages while respecting individual choices.
Framing the conflict solely as a result of U.S. interference or as a war initiated by Ukraine ignores critical facts about Russian aggression and its role in escalating tensions in Eastern Europe. The ongoing support for Ukraine has galvanized international solidarity against authoritarianism. Many countries view their assistance as a stand for democratic values and human rights, reinforcing the idea that the fight against Russian aggression is also a fight for these principles on a global scale.