That column is why I both loved and loathed Friedman. And why I gave up my subscription a couple of years ago. 1) The "if"s: Friedman knows something that he is not telling us 2) The subtle, buried references.
If Ukraine is, indeed, forced to surrender to the specific terms of this “deal”...
...
Neither Fox News nor the White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt will be writing the history of this deal. ...
The Russian invasion of Ukraine, along with Isvassal's genocide in Gaza to which we, the U.S., are principals, are the defining issues of our time. Victors write history. It is very important to Friedman (see below) that, as the victors, the U.S. and Isvassal get the spoils of writing the history of October 7 and of the war. The Ukraine betrayal is not a good piece of business and Friedman does not want the U.S. declaring victory and going home to write the history.
...If you force it upon Ukraine as it is, every one of your names will live in infamy alongside that of Chamberlain...
...
This Trump plan, if implemented, will do the modern equivalent. [of Munich]
...
...as long as I am commander in chief, the United States will pay no price and we will bear no burden in the defense of your freedom.
That's JFK. Today is Nov. 22.
Which is why, if this plan is forced on Ukraine as is...
...
This [Friedman's proposal] would be a dirty deal that history would praise Trump for — getting the best out of a less than perfect hand, by using U.S. leverage on both sides, as he did in Gaza. [Gaza is italicized in original]