|
Why The U.S. Might Want War In Ukraine
Yesterday CNN said that the US is considering sending warships to the Black Sea amid Russia-Ukraine tensions. That the U.S. is 'considering' this is however disinformation:
The United States has notified Turkey that it intends to deploy two warships to the Black Sea amid rising tensions with Russia, Turkish Foreign Ministry sources said on Friday.
Washington made the notification just over two weeks ago, as required under the Montreux Convention on passage through the Straits.
The warships will stay in the Black Sea until 5 May.
"One US warship will arrive on 14 April, and another on 15 April to the Black Sea. And they will leave on 4 May and 5 May, respectively," a source in the Turkish Foreign Ministry said.
The tensions in the Ukraine have built up after the Ukraine transferred heavy forces to the borders of Donetsk and Luhansk, raised Nazi flags and made a lot of noise about reconquering the renegade provinces as well as Crimea.
bigger
Russia has also started some movement of troops and equipment towards its western border. For now these units are just training and not in a position to attack:
Although the US does not see the amassing of Russian forces as posturing for an offensive action, the official told CNN that "if something changes we will be ready to respond." Their current assessment is that the Russians are conducting training and exercises and intelligence has not indicated military orders for further action, the official said, but noted that they are well-aware that could change at any time.
A few weeks ago we explained why the Ukrainian president Zelinsky is under pressure to start a war. The country is bankrupt and in a constitutional crisis. On top of that:
Polling numbers for Zelensky have sharply declined. Right wing city councils call on Zelensky to outlaw the largest opposition party. Meanwhile the pandemic puts a record number of people into hospitals while a meager vaccination campaign is failing.
A war against the eastern separatist could be a Hail Mary attempt by Zelensky to regain some national and international support.
But nothing will happen on the frontline without the consent or even encouragement from Washington DC. The Biden administration is filled with the same delusional people who managed the 2014 coup in Kiev. They may believe that the NATO training the Ukrainian army received and the weapons the U.S. delivered are sufficient to defeat the separatist. But the state of the Ukrainian military is worse than one might think and the separatist will have Russia's full backing. There is no question who would win in such a fight.
Russia has since made its position clear:
Russia will be forced to protect the residents of Donbass if Ukraine launches full-scale hostilities against the region. That’s according to Dmitry Kozak, President Vladimir Putin’s deputy chief of staff, who is himself Ukrainian.
Russia is making such noise to deter Zelensky from any stupid moves. It is however not clear if this will deter Washington DC from ordering Zelensky to attack. The Ukrainian president recently was in Qatar to ask for money. He will soon (again) be in Istanbul to request more drones and likely also 'Syrian rebels' to be used as cannon fodder in the opening of a war.
The weather is not yet optimal to launch an attack. The grounds are still soggy and would hinder heavy weapon movements. The chance for war will increase towards the beginning of May.
But all depends on Washington. Will the Biden administration push Zelensky towards a war that would certainly end with the Ukraine's defeat and dissolution? Why would it do so?
Andrei Martyanov suggests a U.S. geo-strategic motive behind this:
[T]o convince those 447 million EU’s residents that they need America’s protection and weapons, America needs Russia to get into the war in Ukraine and if it will end up with utter destruction, and it will if Russia really decides so, of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and, likely, Ukrainian statehood, so be it.
Americans never really cared how many aborigines die, as long as it works for the US bottom line. Or, if one may, a condition of American condition, which is deteriorating steadily because not only the United States increasingly has very little of substance, that is of high value added, to sell to the world, but forming economic and military monster of Eurasia removes the United States from its, grossly exaggerated to start with, self-proclaimed status of global hegemon to the status of, at best, one of the few big shots on the planet.
At worst, the United States is removed from Eurasia as a viable competitor and is relegated to a status of a regional power —still powerful relative to its continental neighbors but not having a shot at this second number of 4.67 billion [Asians]. This is a big chunk of population and customers. Now imagine if the United States loses EU. Suddenly 4.67 billion become 4.67 billion + 447 million = 5.117 billion, it is 65% of Earth’s population. It is a huge majority of world’s population and, most importantly, population much of which can pay for goods, unlike it is the case with gigantic population of Africa. Moreover, this population is concentrated within a single continental mass which is insulated from the United States by two oceans.
The United States cannot allow this consolidation of the market to happen and the loss of Europe, Washington’s thinking goes, is tantamount to capitulation. So, the United States must hold on to EU, or whatever it will become once EU inevitably collapses, and NATO remains the only tool to drive European weaklings into submission. Making Russia obliterate Ukrainian Armed Forces is a perfect way to scare Europeans into abandoning any attempts to economically compete with the United States and deny them access to Russia’s energy.
Could that really be the U.S. strategy? If so it is rather short term thinking. How long would the new situation of Europe as a U.S. protectorate hold. Five years? A decade?
Moreover as a strategy it is rather poorly thought out and I have yet to detect any serious thought behind most U.S. policies.
Then again – the neo-conservatives in the Biden administration, like Victoria Nuland who is nominated as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, are not known for long term strategic thinking but for ruthless activism. They might want to create chaos in Europe without giving much thought to the aftermath.
Interesting to see the sudden back-peddling by the Kiev mouthpieces. I see a few different things going on here. First, and the biggest, is that I have come to believe that Russia (and China) has finally had enough, what with the constant pinpricks of the Trump years and now the absolute vitriol and diplomacy-killing antics of O’Biden, and have decided that everything else has been tried, the only way the US will listen is if it gets its nose bloodied, and bloodied good. Too many years of no consequences. So with this in mind, I believe Russia (and perhaps China) are actually looking for a good opportunity to inflict pain. In a way, the Nuland crowd have played right into Russia’s hands, because the Ukraine is definitely a place where Russia has escalation dominance. I suspect that when some of those famous military channels began chatting, the Russians were not so friendly, and made it clear that an offensive by the Ukies would not only free Russia’s hand toward the Nazis and provide a perfect excuse to rid the East and South of them, but that Russia would be specifically targeting US/NATO “advisers,” command centers, resupply aircraft or any aircraft entering Ukrainian airspace, and would be just waiting for any US ship in the Black Sea to do something remotely involving it in the conflict, such that it would be on the bottom in minutes. This may have shaken the US military in their boots–they’re not used to being targets. They’re used to walking around stirring mischief all the while feeling they have a get-out-of-jail-free card and would never suffer anything more than a minor inconvenience. Big fucking difference having a superpower say it will be hunting you….
Another dynamic is the marked lack of leadership both in the Ukraine and the US. Biden no doubt waxes nostalgic over his days ruling as a king in the Ukraine…when the haze in his mind clears for a moment…but he’s far from in charge. With no actual leader, the various quasi-criminal cabals are all vying for power and their crack at the loot, but there is much more visible in-fighting and disorganization. The Obama/Nuland Russiaphobes were hot out of the gate, and thought they were still in 2014 and gave Z his marching orders, just assuming Russia would hesitate to act again, totally misreading the situation. The military cabals of both countries would love to crush the civilians and militia of the Donbass, but when it started looking like this would be a fight with Russia, and the gloves would be off, both got cold feet in a hurry. They will still do it if the order to proceed is persistent enough, but they have put things on hold and are lobbying with all their might to have that decision reconsidered. This, along with mundane facts on the ground like the weather b mentioned, has caused much of the delay.
Other considerations include NATO realizing that drawing Russia into a messy, inconclusive brawl would be great for shoring up EU support for NATO and military spending, but NATO forces being rapidly vaporized and shown to be a second-rate police force at best might have the very opposite effect. Another is Germany, who not only fears yet more refugees, but also has probably done the math and realize that for all they want to pontificate about Green-ness, they really need that NS2 pipeline, and they may have told the US that even if Russia rolls into the Ukraine, they are going to refuse to kill NS2 (obviously a big goal of the US). With that “win” off the table, starting a war doesn’t look so profitable to the US, and looses the support of the big oil faction.
I certainly don’t believe we’re out of the woods yet, because the neocon faction and CIA faction and DNC faction still have non-rational, overwhelming hatred for Russia and everything it stands for, as well as a desire to fulfill their wet dream of completing the rape of the Ukraine. This sudden concern for human life from the Ukies may simply be one last stab at polishing their image while they’re waiting for the ground to dry, before unleashing war. But at least now there appear to be some in the West who are not looking at this as a good idea any more.
Posted by: J Swift | Apr 9 2021 22:51 utc | 50
@ Grieved 60 & 61
Thanks, and I’m glad you expounded on two factors which don’t get nearly enough attention. Firstly is that for the neoliberal, Atlanticist, .001%, transnationals, or whatever you want to call them, ANY large, powerful, stable nation-state (or confederation) is something to be broken down into smaller, bickering, chaotic pieces which can be easily manipulated for wealth extraction. Time and time again we’ve seen relatively stable, prosperous nations pounded and fragmented in what at first blush seems pointless destruction, unless it is the very idea of a strong, homogenous nation-state that was the target. The recent overt campaigns against Russia and China are more obvious, of course, but most don’t notice that the others big competitor and threat to be knocked down a few notches was the EU. The overwhelming majority of sanctions have been every bit as much of a blow to the EU as to Russia or China, yet somehow this isn’t noticed. The leadership of Germany and France, among others, have obviously been compromised and ever since Merkle, furious about the NSA tapping of her personal phone, reacted with outrage and then suddenly went silent, it was clear the leadership would be doing what they were told to do. Since then have come a baffling series of moves which are patently contrary to the good of their own countries, such as inviting the massive flood of “refugees” which were then placed on the public dole and allowed to colonize whole cities causing massive internal strife, and then of course continuing to renew the sanctions regime which have obviously been counter-productive by actually strengthening Russia and helping to draw Russia and China together, but have seriously weakened the EU. At any rate, at this point the damage may be irreversible and the EU may very well continue to split…but that was the point of the exercise. Many small, bite sized morsels….
Secondly I applaud your eloquent reminder about the strategy of patience employed so effectively by Putin. I’ll admit, there have been times I’ve caught myself shouting at my monitor over Russia’s outwardly calm response to infuriating provocations. But I take a deep breath, and remember Putin knows in detail what Russia’s capabilities are (and are not, at the moment), and I believe also has a genuine moral code about responding thoughtfully, honorably, and legally, and hindsight has almost always proven his approach correct and with the minimum cost to Russia and maximum energy spent by his foes. Well, and if you let your opponent “push your buttons,” they are controlling you, and he does not want to lose ultimate control of the situation. Russia has been remarkably adept at making moves on its own terms, and often in unexpected and masterful ways. Patience is more than just a virtue, it is vital. At any rate, thanks again for bringing attention to these issues.
Posted by: J Swift | Apr 10 2021 14:09 utc | 100
|
