January 28, 2023

Simply Say No to the New Forever War

American and European political elites seem to be wanting the Russia-Ukraine war to be fought to the last Ukranian and have done nothing to bring peace

Anytime asked about whether the US will alter its policy regarding the turmoil in Ukraine, to start pressing for Kyiv to get into negotiations rather than apparently providing as much money and as several weapons as they ask for,   the Biden administration’s   refrain has become a consistent variation of “ We will keep doing what jooxie is doing as long as it takes. ”

So long as it takes for what?

For Ukraine in order to “ win” its war against Russia, taking back again all land occupied or annexed by Russia since 2014.

While it isn’t clear this is possible, and even less clear that will pursuing such a maximalist outcome is in the American nationwide interest, Joe Biden great administration officials continually play dumb at the notion they might end the war, or they feign offense in the suggestion that the decision isn’t very one entirely up to the Ukrainians, a decision the Biden management cannot and should not in any way influence— it was the Ukrainians, after all, who elected Volodymyr Zelenskyy on a war system.

Except, of course , that he was voted in on a peace platform.

As is now freely acknowledged, instead of then support Zelenskyy when he attempted to get the uanationalists in the far eastern part of Ukraine to submit to central authority and agree to elections per the Steinmeier Formula to apply Minsk II, as negotiated by the governments of Ukraine, Russia, France, and Australia, the Trump administration shrugged and told  Zelenskyy to take a hike.   The frontline uanationalists who told Zelenskyy to visit hell— those are the men the US government has been working with given that 2014 and arming along with heavy weapons since 2017.

Not that all the weapons are getting for them, as no one was amazed to find out— nor a lot of the money for that matter. The situation offers gotten so unacceptable that the  Wa Post , although it still cheers the hurried passage of every new appropriation earmarked for Ukraine, provides dared to openly query where all the guns plus money that aren’t likely to Ukraine are going. CBS released an entire documentary, which was after that almost immediately  partly retracted   pressurized, casting a critical eye on the policy, which is corporate press speak for “ This is a huge problem! ”

Rather than halting or even slowing the process in response to these justified objections, the Pentagon went ahead in Oct and put  US troops   in Ukraine to supervise.

Um. What?

But while the deaths pile up and the stalemate proceeds, Americans should keep in mind that this is all part of the plan: to obtain other people killed so the US government can  deteriorate Russia   and  intimidate China . At least, that is what they believe the plan is doing. It is hard to say for sure. Russia will be economically and technologically less robust over the long term, with no one likes running afoul of the US Treasury, but it obviously seems to push Russian federation and China closer with each other. Was that part of the plan? If so, was it a good strategy?

Other than finally admitting what we already knew, which was that flushing weapons down a black hole half a world away in one of the most corrupt countries within the industrialized world was a poor idea, the so-called Fourth Estate really has been faltering abysmally. Though predictable, the organization press has never met the war it doesn’t love; the copy the  Wall Street Journal   and  Washington Post   have been publishing is naked war porn: daydreams regarding the North Atlantic Treaty Firm (NATO) blowing up the Russian ships blockading Odessa or even about seizing the advantage from China and militarizing, or rather further militarizing, the particular Taiwan Strait in order to display Beijing that Uncle Sam isn’t really going to be intimidated.

Because, you know, that may be how the  Cuban Missile Crisis   was resolved without blowing up the world.

Yikes.

After that there are the tragically misnamed “ think tanks, ” the ones usually funded simply by some combination of foreign money and kindly donations by such equally disinterested 3rd parties as Lockheed Martin and Northrup Grumman— all of these are so totally and obviously legitimate, they aren’t necessary to state any conflicts of interest as they breathlessly bang out their jeremiads about the problems of repeating Munich, of the necessity of maintaining the particular credibility of American protection guarantees— no matter how previously ill thought out, ambiguous, or today plainly inappropriate these guarantees are given the changed conditions of the present.

Even if  Tom Cotton   won’t think we should question whether a security policy designed 70 years ago under very different situations merits questioning, it seems the prudent thing to do.

What’s the war even over, again? Membership within a security alliance Ukraine didn’t qualify for nor would have increased, which is already too big simply by half and which does not even concretely serve United states interests anymore? Democracy? Democracy everywhere is on the line if it vanishes in one of the most peripheral and corrupt countries in every of  Europe, rated upon par with  Russia   itself?

Let’s chance this.

Let’s say “ NO! ” to another forever war. Because while the limitless conflicts of the terror battles could sit and simmer neglected and safely well hidden, quietly costing just a few additional trillion dollars and handful of thousand (American) lives, on no point did some of these conflicts approach the natural dangers of a possible immediate exchange between NATO and Russia, nor did their own carry-on effects threaten the starvation and impoverishment of so many around the globe.

This has gone on long enough.

Mistakes were made— fine, that happens. Nobody is going to own up to them— foreseeable, but that too hardly issues anymore.

Exactly what matters is that multipolarity is a fact, see Olaf Scholz in  Foreign Affairs , which Washington’s own terrible illustration did more than anything else to weaken the “ liberal rules-based international order, ” discover every other invasion of one nation by another over the last thirty years. And while Washington’s capacity for resisting facts is almost because legendary as its penchant for making them up, there still remains time and wish that Americans will be able to rein in their government. The majority nevertheless can’t find Ukraine on a map, know a blank check out isn’t a good policy, and don’t believe Ukraine will earn.

The prospect of American political leadership with all the bravery and vision necessary to chart a new course may be dim, but that should not stop those who oppose the present policy from voicing their own opposition.

Not even close to it.

As  reports   by the  Moments of London   on the Pentagon “ tacitly endorsing” Ukrainian strikes serious into Russia make clear, the current precarious balance between belligerents could shift suddenly along with horrifying consequences.

The only way this was ever going to end, outside of escalation to a war between Russia and NATO and the likely end of human civilization, had been through a negotiated settlement. It appears preferable that any department be done with a pen rather than a gun.

If nothing else has been made clear simply by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the rest of Europe is in simply no danger. If deals could be struck with the likes of Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong, the greatest mass murderers of the twentieth century, and direct support given to the repressive, dictatorial regimes of Suharto, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, Mobutu Sese Seko, and Syngman Rhee, to name just a couple, surely a deal can be carried out with the current occupant of the Kremlin.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *