Is it 1938 — or 2003?
It's 1938 again, and the greatest risk the West faces is not a third world war but appeasement in the face of Vladimir Putin's aggression in Ukraine. No, it's 1964 or 2003, and the U.S. must not again make the mistake of being stampeded into a foolish war like Vietnam or Iraq. Actually, it's 1995, and we have a moral duty to intervene militarily to prevent further slaughter, just as we did in Bosnia. Or it's 2011, and ousting Putin as we did Moammar Gadhafi may lead to chaos and dire unintended consequences. Take your pick. Human beings are wired to make comparisons, and in deciding how to best respond to Putin's invasion of Ukraine, it's natural to fall back on historical analogies. But which moment in history is most relevant? That's tricky business. The choice generally reflects the prior biases and agenda of the chooser, and can thus serve to mislead rather than to illuminate.
Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky, a canny communicator, has been a font of historical analogies. In trying to rally the Western world to do more to aid his country's defense, he evoked the Battle of Britain in a speech to the U.K.'s House of Commons and echoed Winston Churchill's "we shall never surrender" speech. To the U.S. Congress, Zelensky summoned up Pearl Harbor and 9/11. To Israel's Knesset, he spoke of Putin's "final solution" — the extermination of the Ukrainian people. Putin also has evoked World War II in justifying his barbaric assault, telling Russians their soldiers are engaged in a "denazification" program. It is, of course, not 1938, 1964, or 2003, and while the past can inform the present, it cannot tell us with any certainty how to deter or defeat Putin, who, not incidentally, has 6,000 more nuclear weapons than Hitler did. The only clear lesson of history is that 10 or 20 years from now, a sage analyst will declare that some future conflict is "another Ukraine."
This is the editor's letter in the current issue of The Week magazine.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
William Falk is editor-in-chief of The Week, and has held that role since the magazine's first issue in 2001. He has previously been a reporter, columnist, and editor at the Gannett Westchester Newspapers and at Newsday, where he was part of two reporting teams that won Pulitzer Prizes.
-
Bulgaria is the latest government to fall amid mass protestsThe Explainer The country’s prime minister resigned as part of the fallout
-
Is Europe finally taking the war to Russia?Today's Big Question As Moscow’s drone buzzes and cyberattacks increase, European leaders are taking a more openly aggressive stance
-
Pushing for peace: is Trump appeasing Moscow?In Depth European leaders succeeded in bringing themselves in from the cold and softening Moscow’s terms, but Kyiv still faces an unenviable choice
-
Femicide: Italy’s newest crimeThe Explainer Landmark law to criminalise murder of a woman as an ‘act of hatred’ or ‘subjugation’ but critics say Italy is still deeply patriarchal
-
Brazil’s Bolsonaro behind bars after appeals run outSpeed Read He will serve 27 years in prison
-
The $100mn scandal undermining Volodymyr ZelenskyyIn the Spotlight As Russia continues to vent its military aggression on Ukraine, ‘corruption scandals are weakening the domestic front’
-
Americans traveling abroad face renewed criticism in the Trump eraThe Explainer Some of Trump’s behavior has Americans being questioned
-
Nigeria confused by Trump invasion threatSpeed Read Trump has claimed the country is persecuting Christians


