There is no practical solution to the Russo-Ukrainian war. The most one can hope for is to "freeze" it and thereby transform hot war into cold war between Russia and Ukraine and between Russia and the West. Cold war may not be the West's optimal solution, but, while inconvenient for everyone, it will be infinitely preferable to a hot war.
Russian leaders see the protests in Ukraine as part of a Western plot. For them, color revolutions are not manifestations of popular will but a new form of warfare invented by Western governments seeking to remove independently minded national governments. They have argued that this is part of a global strategy to force foreign values on a range of nations around the world that refuse to accept U.S. hegemony, and that Russia was a particular target of this strategy.
Now is the time for the West -- whether NATO, the United States, or individual European states --to provide or sell the high-tech weaponry Ukraine needs to defend itself effectively. The argument against such a move -- that it would provoke a Russian escalation--is no longer valid, now that Russia has escalated. A well-armed Ukraine could stop Putin from embarking on any of these more alarming scenarios.
It's hard to recall a time when the world presented more crises with fewer easy solutions. And for the Republicans, all of these woes have a common genesis: American weakness projected by Barack Obama. People in the Middle East, former Vice President Dick Cheney said recently, "are absolutely convinced that the American capacity to lead and influence in that part of the world has been dramatically reduced by this president." He added, "We've got a problem with weakness, and it's centered right in the White House." Really? It's instructive to ask: What exactly would a Republican president advised by Cheney do in each of these crises? Let's take them one at a time.