I'm Still Working Through This Puzzle

I've mentioned here already that by far the best coverage of the Russo-Ukraine war is at the leftist Daily Kos, and that's a puzzle, because the left as we used to understand it, even well after the death of Stalin, was always inclined to idealize the Soviet Union. Go no farther than the leftist Sen Sanders, about whom there is dispute whether a 1988 trip there with his new wife following their wedding was a honeymoon, though the trip definitely did occur.

A little over a generation later, it seems like the left is taking the lead in opposing Russia's invasion of Ukraine, even at the price of endorsing Reagan-era neoconservative policy, and in fact neoconservatives like Eliot Cohen and Frederick Kagan are being rehabilitated. For now, I just don't have an explanation, except to note that this is taking place. But let's look at the analysis in today's update from the Daily Kos:

The U.S. is sending its heavy vehicles by ship. There’s 200 of these on the way, plus hundreds of more Humvees, so this is likely more efficient than trying to fly them in. Also, it seems that things like artillery cannons and ammunition are higher priority for limited air transport space. I looked up shipping times from Georgia to France (no idea what port they’re going to), and it’s 24 days. Then they have to be unloaded and rail-shipped to Poland, and then transported across the border however that’s done (no one is talking about it for obvious reasons). So optimistically, all this armor won’t be in Ukraine’s hands for at least another 6-8 weeks.

Ukraine needs to buy time, and it seems that keeping Severodonetsk in Ukrainian hands for the next few weeks is part of that strategy.

Furthermore, there is suspicion in Ukraine that Russia is convincing its western allies to trade Ukrainian territory for a cease-fire. France and Germany certainly seem squishy, and Ukrainian media wasn’t happy when the United States and Russia re-established their military deescalation hotline. We might think, “good! Less chance of a misunderstanding escalating to nuclear war!” But Ukraine is convinced that Russia is in a full-court diplomatic press to freeze the conflict at its current status quo, averting a prolonged war (and its effects on the global economy and food supply), all for the low-low price of just the Donbas and Kherson.

Whatever Ukraine’s motivations, all indications are that the situation in the Donbas is desperate.

. . . Finally, let’s remember the full scale and context of the current battle zone:

Everything that is happening now is the culmination of incredibly shrinking Russian ambitions. Ukraine holds around 5,000 square miles of Donbas territory. That Lysychansk/Severodonetsk pocket would get Russia 5-10% of that territory. They've got a long way to go.

In contrast, today's update from the neoconservative Institute for the Study of War is flaccid and obtuse:

Russian forces have made steady, incremental gains in heavy fighting in eastern Ukraine in the past several days, though Ukrainian defenses remain effective overall. Deputy Ukrainian Defense Minister Hanna Malyar stated that the fighting is currently at its "maximum intensity” compared to previous Russian assaults and will likely continue to escalate. Spokesperson for the Ukrainian Defense Ministry Oleksandr Motuzyanyk characterized Russian gains as “temporary success” and stated that Ukrainian forces are using a maneuver defense to put pressure on Russian advances in key areas. Russian forces have now taken control of over 95% of Luhansk Oblast and will likely continue efforts to complete the capture of Severodonetsk in the coming days.

Their discussion of what's happening is vague and uninformative, and any attempt to explain why is completely absent.

The Daily Kos analysis also puts in context the recent statement by Henry Kissinger at the World Economic Forum:

Kissinger, who turns 99 years old on May 27, has generated even more controversy for himself. Speaking at the Davos World Economic Forum this week, the former statesman had a piece of advice for the Ukrainian government: it's time to think about a diplomatic settlement to end the war, and that settlement will have to include territorial concessions to Russia. "Ideally, the dividing line should be a return to the status quo ante," Kissinger surmised, referring to the pre-war lines in which Russia controlled the Crimean Peninsula and approximately a third of territory in the Donbas. "Pursuing the war beyond that point would not be about the freedom of Ukraine, but a new war against Russia itself."

However, Secretary Blinken so far has insisted that any decision to cede territory is up to Ukraine, which appears to be a change in policy from what had been articulated prior to the invasion. As of December 9, 2021,

President Joe Biden's administration is reportedly going to urge Ukraine's government to cede territory to Russia-backed groups in an attempt to appease Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The Associated Press reports American officials plan on pushing Ukraine to grant autonomy to eastern regions of the country which are currently under the control of Russia-backed separatists who revolted in 2014.

Nevertheless, even then, US policy would have been to arm Ukraine and eastern NATO countries in the event of an actual invasion:

In a two-hour call with Putin, Biden warned if Russia invades Ukraine, the United States will take action.

“There was a lot of give and take. There was no finger-wagging,” says White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan who also says if Russian troops move in, America would support its allies. “We would provide additional defensive material to the Ukrainians above and beyond that which we are already providing and we would fortify our NATO allies on the Eastern Flank with additional capabilities in response to such an escalation.”

However, the question once the invasion took place was what kind of weapons to send, and how many. Every indication is that the administration's policy did change over a period of weeks following the invasion, and the Daily Kos story indicates that it's changing even as of today:

The United States’s decision on whether to send MLRS/HIMARS rocket artillery to Ukraine has been painfully long and torturous, but they’re reportedly on the verge of making it happen. According to CNN’s sources, the problem is fear “Ukraine could use the systems to carry out offensive attacks inside Russia … The MLRS and its lighter-weight version, the HIMARS, can launch as far as 300km, or 186 miles.”

Nobody else, as far as I can see, is reporting on this policy change and what is driving it, either short term or over past generations. Kissinger, who according to the link above is almost 100 years old, was the architect of detante, the pre-Reagan lowering of tensions with the Soviet Union. But as even Barack Obama unintentionally pointed out in 2012, the '80s called, and they want their foreign policy back. Why is the left now the group that's most on top of this?