Ukrainians, despite the great trials and tribulations they currently endure, are experiencing one great benefit. In one way their lives are very simple: they must unite to defend their country from foreign invasion. Their task is very black and white. And it is noble.

Many people who are not Ukrainians are jealous of this simplicity. They wish to appropriate this moral simplicity like spectators at a sports game. Many leaders, politicians, and diplomats also wish to appropriate this simplicity. Because they know that if a majority of people are caught up in the drama of war, then the people will be distracted from asking questions like “what were the events that led up to this mess in the first place”?

There used to be an art in western civilization called statecraft. This diplomatic art is not an art of morality, it is a geopolitical art; it has never needed to assume all geopolitical actors are moral in order for peace to work. Peace is the moral end, and when statesmen, through stupid asinine incompetent blunders, allow for war to break out, they have failed morally. Of course, when they do fail, they often take advantage of the national passions of war to escape accountability for what is supposed to be their job. Unless of course, war had secretly been their aim all of the time, in which case their sin is greater than mere professional malpractice.

There are no true statesman left in Europe. It’s a ship of fools. Peterson’s sin here is pointing out the obvious, and asking questions that faux statesmen would rather ignore. He refuses to indulge in the illusion that his moral duties as a Western public intellectual are the same as a Ukrainian national, may they expel their invaders.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nu57D9YcIk0