In what way ? That Putin is like Hitler or that Ukraine is giving American weapons and equipment to Russian neo-nazis who aim to overthrow Putin and launch a European wide "white revolution" ??
I honestly see very little in common with Munich 1938 and the present situation. One of the most glaring differences is the difference in strength between Nazi Germany in 1938 and contemporary Russia. I would argue that a much better comparison would be to the Russian empire at the end of the First World War. Much like contemporary Russia, the Russian empire was not able to cope with the challenges of the First World War and was losing militarily. In order to hasten Russia's exit from the war the Germans decided to send Lenin to Russia. I assume their goal was to "poke Russia in the eye". This led to a socialist revolution in Russia that then had severe ramifications for the rest of the world. It is incredibly short sighed to think that what happens in post- Ukraine war Russia will stay confined to the borders of Russia. Hence my concern with Ukraine arming these nutcases and extremists. It is rather reminiscent of what the Germans did with Lenin in 1917...
This article describes this event fairly well:
The Russian Revolution has gone down in history as the victory of the workers and peasants over the czarist rulers. Few people realize the German kaiser was also involved: He gave aid to the Bolsheviks in 1917.
www.dw.com
I consider myself well read on the events of the Great War, including the war in the East. Yes, Germany made a strategic bargain with the devil to attempt to force Russia out of the war. For the short term it worked, and because of the availability of those troops, Germany very nearly won the war in the west in spring of 1918. But they didn't, and the arrival of dozens of fresh divisions of US troops forced a capitulation by the fall. Other than geographic, I see little parallel to situation in Ukraine. Denis "Nikitin" Kapustin, however annoying to the Kremlin, is no Vladimir Ilyich Ulyano (Lenin). And in this case, Russia has no one to blame but itself should radical movements begin to take hold.
Had Putin focused a bit more on sewer systems, highways, and expanding power grids rather than T-90 tanks, he and his country would likely be in a far better and more stable place right now.
However, the Czech crisis, is to me stunning in its parallels - and I am hardly alone in recognizing them. In 1938 Germany was not the war machine it would be 40/41 when it rolled across France and very nearly toppled the Soviet Union. Hitler's territorial ambitions could have been stopped by the French and British, particularly the French Army, had the two allies been willing to act. They didn't and an emboldened and ever stronger Hitler and his Wehrmacht felt free to move on Poland a year later. The whole world paid for that collapse of Western European will through an enormous cost in blood and treasure over the next six years.
Ukraine has to be looked upon as a continuum of Russian military actions and NATO responses beginning in 2014. The seizure of the Crimean Peninsula was essentially coup de main. Fortunately, both the Ukrainian government, far sighted politicians and military leaders in Ukraine and NATO did take the lessons of 1938 seriously. Unlike Czechoslovakia, it would take more than one military operation for Putin to succeed in his territorial ambitions in Ukraine.
During the next eight years, Ukraine aggressively embraced the Western way of war. Their officers participated in NATO maneuvers; contingents served alongside NATO forces in Afghanistan; other officers and NCOs attended command and staff courses and NCO development programs across NATO; and the Ukrainian Army initiated a major reorganization, largely under British and American guidance, that mirrored the NATO brigade combat team structure.
Unlike Czechoslovakia in 1938, when Russian tanks rolled in February of 22, the Ukrainian Army had already reached a point that it could bring the onslaught to a halt well short of its objectives. A year later is poised to potentially defeat the Russian Army in the field.
Again, like 1938, had Putin's army marched into Kyiv as he expected, does anyone seriously believe that this would have been his last "territorial demand" - to quote Hitler. Russia clearly covets the Baltics, and success in Ukraine abetted by a passive NATO could have led to a miscalculation on Putin's part that could easily also have paralleled Poland in 1939, carrying the remarkable analogy even farther.
I find the whole neo-nazi name calling truly tiresome. Yes, there were some elements of the militias, particularly Azov, that claimed a heritage with the Ukrainian WWII units that sided with Germany in opposing the Soviet Regime. It is a credit to Russian propaganda that they have succeeded in getting some in Western Europe and many of their supporters in Eastern Europe to magnify the claims that the Ukrainian Army is composed of neo-nazis.
What is factual and what is playing out on TV and computer screens across the world is the Ukrainian people are willing to endure almost any sacrifice to preserve their right of self-determination and their hope of becoming a full member of the European community of nations. What is equally clear is that Putin has attempted to unleash the power of a corrupt and tyrannical state to prevent those aspirations. I have no doubt in my mind where lies the right side of history.
And from a purely national interest perspective, I have absolutely no question that stopping Russian territorial ambitions and hamstringing its military modernization is critical in my country's strategic confrontation with China.
