Today's 1932, 1936, 1938, 1939, 1940 . . .

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, combined with the weak response from the West, parallels Imperial Japan’s invasion of China in 1932. Or is it Fascist Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia (Abyssinia) in 1936. Perhaps it’s Nazi Germany’s Sudetenland demands of 1938 and annexation of the rest of Czechoslovakia in 1939? Maybe it’s parallel to the German invasion of Poland later that same year, the Soviet invasion of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in 1939-40, Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, Afghanistan in 1979, the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008 or Ukraine in 2014. Now that I’ve listed those (admittedly missing many other examples) I have to say, there are a lot of parallels to pull from. In all cases, sovereign countries were invaded in wars of choice by those conducting the invasion.

What right does any country have to invade another? What right does any leader have to inflict harm on the civilians of another country? The answer is: None.

What obligation does the rest of the world have when yet another egocentric, self-isolated, dictator with zero regard for human life other than his own orders an attack on others? The answer is: We all have a responsibility to stand up and say “THIS CANNOT STAND.” If we fail to stand now, we will have to stand later for more cost, inducing more suffering, and we will hold the responsibility for all those extra who suffer because of the variance between standing now and then.

Standing against Russian aggression in Ukraine will be costly, both economically, and potentially in terms of human lives. Yet, not standing invites more aggression by Russia and others. The world learns from precedent. If those in charge of countries see little to no cost in invading their neighbors then this will not end here. In the 1930s the West was still shocked by the cost of what they referred to as The Great War (World War I) and no rational person wanted to have a second. Unfortunately, they were dealing with irrational people. We are in the same space today. Those who launched this war of choice are not acting rationally. They are acting from delusional fear. The world cannot allow a dictator’s personal fears lead anyone but themselves into suffering.

The rule of law, democracy, international law, and human rights demand we stand up as a United Nations again, like we did in the 1940s to stop this naked aggression. Ukraine was a founding member of The United Nations in 1945. Ukraine, like every other country, has the right to exist in peace and security. No other country, no matter if it has nuclear weapons or is a permanent member of the Security Council, has the right to act otherwise.

History does not repeat, but there are plenty of parallels. Let’s not condemn millions of people to suffering because we are too week to stop the parallels here and now. Stand with Ukraine against Russian aggression. Stand with the United Nations to support the right of states to exist. Stand with humanity to protect the lives of all the innocent civilians caught up in this tragedy brought to life through the mind of yet another dictator.

This Idea Will Save Humanity

Coal and Steel were what divided France and Germany. Both wanted it, both had some of it, but not enough for either one. Therefore, among other things, they fought over Alsace-Lorraine, a region rich in the coal needed to produce steel. An ancient enmity realized in multiple wars cost countless lives. Through these wars, the main engines of Europe exhausted themselves. They could no longer maintain the capacity to fight. They simply ran out of people, resources, and the will to continue dying for simple material resources. Instead, along with Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Italy, they created the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) as a means by which to share these precious resources, building off of their shared capacity to build their respective economies. Once they started sharing these resources, and building their economies back up after the utter destruction of the two world wars, they realized the more they integrated their economies, the better they would all do. This wasn’t hope, it was proven fact. Through a long process the ECSC turned into the European Economic Community, then the European Community, and most recently, the European Union. From the humble start of a single authority for Coal and Steel, eventually the countries of Europe were able to create a better life and future for all their citizens by unifying their economies. They hit hurdles in terms of creating a unified banking system to support a common currency, a unified political system, and a unified foreign policy, and it was these hurdles which sowed the seeds of disenchantment with the European experiment in the minds of some within its borders.


The last one, the foreign policy, is where I came in. In 1997 I began my study abroad in Belgium to learn about the European Union, to understand its history, institutions, and potential promise for humanity. I became a fan of May 9 (Europe Day), the European Anthem, and Robert Schuman (some call him the father of Europe). I love the idea of subsidiarity, where decisions are made at the lowest-most appropriate level, and was enamored by the idea of proliferating the ideals of the European Union to other parts of the world. I have not lost this intent. In fact, as the EU struggles under the pressure of inequality, where the benefits of integration went to the upper classes at the expense of everyone else, we can realize the lessons from this integration to create even more powerful supranational institutions for the benefit of humanity in all parts of the world.


In 2000, I launched my Fulbright, studying how NATO and the EU could work together for the security of the Trans-Atlantic Community, and the world. As I witness our current president pulling away from our allies, and the EU’s challenges with Brexit, I can’t help but feel both saddened by what’s becoming of the inexpensive Russian influence operations to destabilize the United States, the UK, NATO, and the EU. At the same time, I can see the seeds of the EU still flourishing, and want to bring these back to Europe, take them abroad, and show the world how we can all prosper from opening our economies, our borders, and our economic systems to each other, hopefully without the need to go to war first.


Today I look out and see the need for a decision by all currently in power. Will we let our world descend into the chaos of another war, led by the powers of illiberalism on one side, and those remaining to support the rule of law, economic integration, and individual freedom, on the other? I do not want to see this war, but it really looks like it’s coming.


Whether or not we end up in another world war, what happens after is what offers me, and humanity, hope. If some collection of us survive, we will need each other more than ever to solve shared problems. We will need to be focused on results, rather than philosophies, enmities, and histories, in order to improve our lives. We will be able to learn from the past to ensure we distribute the benefits of integration to all in society, rather than those only at the top. We will know where some of the landmines are (ensuring we minimize the wealth gap), so we can avoid them in our effort to rebuild, renew, and rise again as a prosperous society in which children can once again have the promise fulfilled of having better lives than their parents. We can have this worldwide, and I look forward to helping bring it to reality. Who would like to help?