Tag: russia

The Insanity of the Regime Changers

Garry Kasparov calls for more regime changes in The Wall Street Journal:

A war can’t be won by following the rules set in peacetime. The only way to win this long war is through regime change in Moscow and Tehran. Such change will be brought closer by isolating Russia and Iran politically and economically and by halting their foreign aggression.

Kasparov’s argument is deranged, but it is useful in reminding us how extreme and dangerous this worldview is. If hardliners like Kasparov had their way, they would unleash chaos and instability unlike anything most of us have seen in our lifetimes. The same people that want to set the world on fire are constantly warning us that if we don’t do what they want that we face “a global catastrophe the likes of which we have never seen,” but it is clear that they are the ones demanding that the U.S. initiate such a catastrophe with overly aggressive policies.

If the only way to “win” is regime change in two countries, that tells us that winning is not a realistic goal. Kasparov seems to think that setting a goal, no matter how unhinged or far-fetched, is all that matters. Is the goal achievable at a reasonable cost? He doesn’t care about that. He writes, “Supporting Ukraine until it is whole and free is a goal. Promoting long-term peace in Europe and the Middle East by doing everything possible to accelerate the downfall of hostile regimes in Russia and Iran is a goal.” It’s true that these are goals in the same way that saying you want to fly to the moon is a goal.

The surest way to destroy international support for Ukraine is to adopt an insane, maximalist goal of regime change in Russia. Many governments are willing to back a policy aimed at defending against an aggressor, but they are not going to support one that threatens to destabilize a large part of Eurasia and potentially risk significant escalation from Moscow. Seeking to topple both governments is also a good way to encourage the Russian government to increase its threats of using nuclear weapons and to push the Iranian government into pursuing their own nuclear arsenal. The worst thing that the U.S. could do is convince these governments that they are in a fight for their survival.

Regime change is almost never the right answer. When it “works” and the targeted regime is toppled, it typically creates many more problem and dangers than it eliminates. When it fails and backfires, it leads to even greater hostility and it could lead to direct conflict. We know that setting regime change as an official goal can pave the way for war later when other means fail to bring down the government. The U.S. should not seek war with Russia or Iran, and so it should not adopt a policy that makes that war much more likely.

Keep reading

Ukraine Passes Bill To Recruit Prisoners For Depleted Army Ranks

The severe manpower crisis of Ukraine’s armed forces continues to be on display, particularly after the recent decision of the government to deny embassy and consular services for Ukrainian men of fighting age who live abroad but refuse to come back home.

Ukraine’s parliament on Wednesday just once again upped the controversy and advanced a dramatic change in law and national policy. It passed a bill enabling select prisoners to be released in order to fight in the armed forces.

“The parliament has voted ‘yes,'” MP Olena Shuliak, head of Zelensky’s party, announced in a social media post. “The draft law opens the possibility for certain categories of prisoners who expressed a desire to defend their country to join the Defense Forces,” she said.

Ironically Moscow has previously come under international condemnation and mockery for just such a policy.

AFP and other international outlets acknowledged this as follows: “Long-opposed to the measure and having criticized Moscow’s mobilization of prisoners to fill its ranks, Kyiv has recently U-turned amid fresh Russian advances on the battlefield,” a report said.

The legislation still has to be signed by parliament’s chairperson and President Zelensky in order to come into force as an active policy. The bill includes the following reported stipulations and parameters:

  • Prisoners must volunteer
  • Only those with three or more years left on their sentence can apply
  • Those convicted of violent sexual crimes are not eligible
  • Former high-ranking officials and those guilty of “serious corruption” are not eligible
  • Prisoners who killed two or people are not eligible

One glaring aspect is that it appears literal murderers can possibly still go free if they join the army, so long as they killed no more than one person, based on the AFP’s reporting

Keep reading

Ukrainians are God’s chosen people – Zelensky

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has proclaimed that God is an “ally” of Ukraine in the conflict with Russia. Despite his invoking of the Almighty, Zelensky has led a crackdown on the Orthodox Church for the last two years.

As Orthodox Christians celebrated Easter on Sunday, Zelensky released a video address from Kiev’s Saint Sophia Cathedral, in which he accused Russia of “breaking all the commandments.”

“The world sees it, God knows it,” he said. “And we believe God has a chevron with the Ukrainian flag on his shoulder. So, with such an ally, life will definitely win over death.”

Zelensky’s appeal to Christians came as Ukraine’s parliament examines legislation that would close down the country’s largest Christian church, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC). While the law has sat in parliament for months, Zelensky’s government has moved to restrict the Church’s activity since the conflict began in 2022.

Keep reading

The Great Ukraine Robbery is Not Over Yet

The ink was barely dry on President Biden’s signature transferring another $61 billion to the black hole called Ukraine, when the mainstream media broke the news that this was not the parting shot in a failed US policy. The elites have no intention of shutting down this gravy train, which transports wealth from the middle and working class to the wealthy and connected class.

Reuters wrote right after the aid bill was passed that, “Ukraine’s $61 billion lifeline is not enough.” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell went on the Sunday shows after the bill was passed to say that $61 billion is “not a whole lot of money for us…” Well, that’s easy for him to say – after all it’s always easier to spend someone else’s money!

Ukraine’s foreign minister,  Dmytro  Kuleba, was far from grateful for the $170 billion we have shipped thus far to his country. In an interview with Foreign Policy magazine as the aid package was passed, Kuleba had the nerve to criticize the US for not producing weapons fast enough. “If you cannot produce enough interceptors to help Ukraine win the war against the country that wants to destroy the world order, then how are you going to win in the war against perhaps an enemy who is stronger than Russia?”

How’s that for a “thank you”?

Keep reading

The United States-Ukraine Security Pact Is Lipstick on a Bloody Defeat for NATO

The United States and Ukraine are moving toward signing a 10-year bilateral security pact. But former Pentagon analyst David Pyne sees it as a sign that Washington realizes Russia is near to outright victory in the conflict.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has this week renewed talk about signing a long-term security alliance with the United States. The Biden administration seems to be amenable to signing off on the pact.

Such a move may appear to give the U.S. a long-term foothold in Ukraine but, says Pyne, it is being proposed from a position of weakness, not strength.

Russia has all but won the war that escalated in February 2022. Earlier predictions by NATO states that Ukraine would defeat Russia are shown to be a cruel fantasy.

Despite massive supplies of weapons to Ukraine from the United States and its NATO allies, Russia is prevailing militarily. David Pyne reckons that Russia’s anticipated offensive over the summer dry period will result in a decisive victory before the end of the year.

The signing of a security pact between the U.S. and Ukraine is a way to put lipstick on what is otherwise a crushing defeat for the NATO side.

Pyne points out that Russia will be in a dominant position to make sure that Ukraine does not become a member of NATO. That has always been a key demand by Moscow

Keep reading

Hungarian Foreign Minister Warns Macron Risks Sparking World War III

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has warned that French President Emmanuel Macron’s threat to send NATO troops to Ukraine risks sparking World War III.

In an interview with The Economist last week, Macron said the question of sending western troops to Ukraine would “legitimately” arise if Russia broke through the Ukrainian front lines and Kyiv made such a request.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reacted by describing Macron’s statements as “very dangerous.”

Now Hungarian diplomat Peter Szijjarto warns that the French leader’s comments represent a stunning escalation.

“If a NATO member commits ground troops, it will be a direct NATO-Russia confrontation and it will then be World War Three,” said Szijjarto.

He also drew attention to the fact that such a conflict would likely escalate into nuclear confrontation.

“Let’s be clear: if there is a nuclear war, everything and everyone will be lost. If there is a nuclear war, everyone will die and everything will be destroyed, which no one with any common sense can wish for,” said Szijjarto.

Meanwhile, senior Italian government officials have joined the growing number of prominent voices condemning Macron over his comments.

“Sending Italian soldiers to fight outside the EU borders? Follow the obsessions of some dangerous and desperate European leader like Macron? No thanks, never in the name of the League,” remarked Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini.

Keep reading

Reuters Revealed The Reason Why Niger Asked American Troops To Leave The Country

All the media hype about the reasons why this happened (ex: “Russian influence”) and the expected consequences (ex: “an upsurge in terrorism”) distract from the fact that this was entirely avoidable and only occurred because the US inexplicitly disrespected Niger despite having lost its leverage over it last summer.

Reuters cited an unnamed US official to report on Thursday that Russian troops are based in the same Nigerien military facility as American ones, which Secretary of Defense Austin later confirmed. Other outlets reported the same citing their own sources, and it’s unclear whether the same individual spoke to them too. In any case, what’s most interesting about their report is the remainder of what they said was revealed to them about the larger context within which this latest development is taking place.

According to them, “Niger’s move to ask for the removal of U.S. troops came after a meeting in Niamey in mid-March, when senior U.S. officials raised concerns including the expected arrival of Russia forces and reports of Iran seeking raw materials in the country, including uranium. While the U.S. message to Nigerien officials was not an ultimatum, the official said, it was made clear U.S. forces could not be on a base with Russian forces. ‘They did not take that well,’ the official said.”

In other words, the American military delegation arrogantly told their hosts that they don’t want Russian troops in close proximity to theirs, which prompted them to subsequently request their withdrawal. Niger wanted to cut the costs and time required for receiving Russian advisors, hence why it sought to base them in a separate hanger at the same facility as US troops outside the capital instead of building a new base. This pragmatic move was within Niger’s sovereign rights as a UN-recognized state.

Keep reading

France Sends Troops to Ukraine Frontlines

France has officially deployed 100 soldiers of the Foreign Legion to the frontlines in Ukraine, where they will offer support to the Ukrainian 54th Independent Mechanized Brigade.

Although the initial deployment is just 100 artillery and surveillance experts, around 1,500 French soldiers from the Legion are scheduled to be deployed in Ukraine.

President Macron has been repeatedly rebuffed in his calls for NATO countries to send troops to Ukraine. He has stated publicly that “nothing should be excluded” as a potential response by Ukraine’s NATO allies.

The official US position is still that it opposes sending troops to Ukraine, other than in an advisory role.

Keep reading

UK Vows To Arm Ukraine For ‘As Long as It Takes’ – Commits $3.7BN Annually

The UK has committed to what might be called ‘forever aid’ in Ukraine’s defense, with British Foreign Secretary David Cameron newly promising $3.74 billion of annual military aid for Kiev for “as long as it takes”.

He unveiled the plan Thursday, and it marks the biggest commitment in foreign defense aid rollout for Britain thus far in the war (and perhaps in all of history), coming on the heels of the Biden administration also seeking to erect a 10-year plan to assist Ukraine which theoretically would lock in future US presidents as well.

“We will give 3 billion pounds every year for as long as is necessary. We’ve just really emptied all we can in terms of giving equipment,” Cameron told Reuters in an interview on a visit to the Ukrainian capital.

“Some of that [equipment] is actually arriving in Ukraine today, while I’m here,” he said. Alarmingly, he openly stated that the British government has no problem with Ukrainian forces using UK weapons to strike at targets inside Russian territory.

“Ukraine has that right. Just as Russia is striking inside Ukraine, you can quite understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure it’s defending itself,” Cameron said.

“It’s absolutely crucial, not just in terms of the weapons it will bring, but also the boost to morale that it will bring to people here in Ukraine,” the UK top diplomat continued in the remarks given upon his second visit to the war-ravaged country as foreign secretary.

Cameron was at one point asked whether a potential future Trump administration could negatively impact the flow of aid to the Zelensky government.

He responded: “It’s not for us to decide who the Americans choose as their president. We will work with whoever that is.” NATO officials have reportedly been attempting to “Trump-proof” any future aid.

Last Sunday, Zelensky himself signaled as much in a nightly video address, saying that he’s working with Washington on a bilateral security agreement which would last ten years. “We are already working on a specific text,” Zelensky said in his nightly video address. “Our goal is to make this agreement the strongest of all.”

“We are discussing the specific foundations of our security and cooperation. We are also working on fixing specific levels of support for this year and the next 10 years.”

Keep reading

U.S. Government Helps Pro-Ukraine Media Spread Propaganda And Silence American Critics

Ukraine’s American-backed fight against Russia is being waged not only in the blood-soaked trenches of the Donbas region but also on what military planners call the cognitive battlefield — to win hearts and minds.

A sprawling constellation of media outlets organized with substantial funding and direction from the U.S. government has not just worked to counter Russian propaganda but has supported strong censorship laws and shutdowns of dissident outlets, disseminated disinformation of its own, and sought to silence critics of the war, including many American citizens.

Economist Jeffrey Sachs, commentator Tucker Carlson, journalist Glenn Greenwald, and University of Chicago Professor John Mearsheimer are among the critics on both the left and the right who have been cast as part of a “network of Russian propaganda.”

But the figures targeted by the Ukrainian watchdog groups are hardly Kremlin agents. They simply have forcefully criticized dominant narratives about the war.

Sachs is a highly respected international development expert who has angered Ukrainian officials over his repeated calls for a diplomatic solution to the current military conflict. Last November, he gave a speech at the United Nations calling for a negotiated peace.

Mearsheimer has written extensively on international relations and is a skeptic of NATO expansion. He predicted that Western efforts to militarize Ukraine would lead to a Russian invasion.

Greenwald is a Pulitzer Prize-winning independent journalist who has criticized not just war coverage but media dynamics that suppress voices that run counter to U.S. narratives.

“What they mean when they demand censorship of ‘pro-Russia propaganda’ is anything that questions the US/EU role in the Ukraine war or who dissents from their narratives,” Greenwald has observed.

Keep reading