“The president has been clear that he is focused on peace,” a White House official told CBS News. “We need our partners to be committed to that goal as well. We are pausing and reviewing our aid to ensure that it is contributing to a solution.”
So…engineer an incident, fill it with lies and Russian talking points, then use it as an excuse to cut off support.
In B-school, we called this “setting them up to fail”.
Steve
European nations will help enough so as, themselves, become independent of USA and Russia, or they will not and will fall under domination of an “accomodation” of the two old ever nastier powers.
Clearly its Europe’s problem. They seem to be saying the right words. But they have a long history of talking big and deciding not to spend the money. We shall see if they follow through. (While saying they must have US support.)
I am not a big fan of the current president. Having said that, let us rewind a bit, specifically all the way to 1990, german reunification, then forward a bit to 1997, NATO-Russia founding act…
NATO and US have reneged on their promise to Russia. NATO, Russia have reneged on their promise to Ukraine… Ukraine was not thinking clearly when they gave up those nukes.
Before we criticize current administration, let us not forget Biden administration made no attempt for peace, and only interested in bleeding Russian army. There are lot of blame to go around.
Lastly, even before Trump openly talked the silent part of Ukraine minerals deal, EU has its hands in the cookie jar too, I mean, why else EU give “loans” to Ukraine, except to protect its economic interest in the Ukraine minerals?? Yeap, EU has its own deal with Ukraine for those minerals.
Now, Russia invaded not only to stop the march of NATO, but the minerals are mostly situated where Russia already occupies!!!
The problem with the current President is his methods, his style and his inability to strike a deal.
Except in his 2021 screed, Putin hardly mentioned NATO at all. Taking over Ukraine is part of his greater Russia dream. the Russian version of “manifest destiny”.
Steve
However, recently declassified documents—published Thursday by the National Security Archive, a private research group, which obtained them through a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act—reveal that the argument is nonsense.
Ukraine lacked the resources to maintain the nearly 1,700 Soviet nuclear weapons on its soil, many of them on intercontinental ballistic missiles that were nearing the end of their service lives
They didn’t need to maintain 1,700 weapons – 200 are enough to put the planet into nuclear winter and starve most of us. Ukraine is a well educated and technologically sophisticated country. They’d have no problem marshaling the manpower to maintain a nuclear deterrent.
intercst
You expect everyone to be like Trump, speak loudly? In geopolitics the real reasons need not have to be spelled out…
Perhaps.
Ukraine government was very corrupt in 1991. And they little means to spend on defense. In fact, they rapidly downsized their military.
https://www.fpri.org/article/2018/08/the-ukrainian-military-from-degradation-to-renewal/
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine inherited one of the largest armies in Europe. Its armed forces had 780,000 troops, 6,500 tanks, 1,100 combat aircraft, and more than 500 ships. With 176 intercontinental ballistic missiles and over 1,000 tactical nuclear weapons, the country possessed the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal, behind only the United States and Russia. At the time, Ukrainian officials saw this vast military as superfluous. NATO had turned from an adversary to a partner, and the Soviet Union’s peaceful dissolution made armed conflict with Russia less likely. Ukraine suffered a deep economic crisis and could not afford to support such a large military. So when the country embarked on its first armed forces reform in the 1990s—aimed at adapting the Soviet military into a modern force—the first order of business was the reduction of military structures and personnel and, under international pressure, the renunciation of nuclear weapons.
US military aid did not really accelerate until after the Maiden Square uprising and Ukraine’s repeal of their stated neutrality status.
Which is illegal. Don’t worry he will have to give them the weapons and money that Congress already voted to allocate.
SMiC proving he has already surrendered.
He was already impeached once for withholding military aid. He has already demonstrated that behavior more egregious than defying Congress will not result in a conviction in an impeachment. He is exempt from all criminal penalties.
But, most telling, while he dumps on Zelensky over and over, he says we need to be nice to Putin, to bring him to the table. Already conceded no US security guarantee. Already conceded no NATO membership for Ukraine. Already shut down the FBI office that watched for Russian interference in the US. Already shut down USian cyber operation against Russia. Is considering repealing sanctions against Russia. And what has the “arty” dealmaker won from Russia, for all this “nice”? Nothing.
Steve
Who’s going to force him, Lindsey Graham?
He gave the military aid after they threatened him with lawsuits. Where do you think Ukraine got their javelins?
The same courts that forced him last time.
And if he decides to defy the courts this time? Or the new Congress produces a party line vote to revoke the aid, because he said so?
Steve
Difficult when the two largest EU economies are failing, one of them for relying on God Green and Devil Russia way too much.
The Captain
Ukranians need to fire entitled stupid Zelensky. He insulted Americans in America. He is done.
EU is all talk and photo ops.
And you can bet Iran took notice…
Even Marco Rubio understood this when he was a Senator.
