Politico: lessons from the Caribbean crisis are holding back the USThe United States is investing more and more money in maintaining the conflict in Ukraine, writes Politico.
Against this background, tensions in relations between Washington and Moscow are increasing. However, the threat of a nuclear confrontation with Russia deters the White House from rash steps.
Andrew Desiderio, Nahal Toosi, Jonathan LemireThe United States is getting deeper into the armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and on several fronts at once, although the president and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee compare this conflict with the peak of the Cold War.
Shortly after Ukraine allegedly blew up the only bridge connecting Crimea with Russia, and Moscow retaliated by launching missile strikes on 20 Ukrainian cities, a senior American official confirmed that now the highest priority for Western sponsors of Ukraine is the supply of modern air defense systems there. This statement was made after President Joe Biden promised him such assistance in a telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky.
This week, American diplomats at the UN are calling on the member countries of this organization to support a resolution condemning Russia for its claims about the annexation of four Ukrainian territories. A vote on the resolution is expected on Wednesday.
Meanwhile, US lawmakers are recalling Ukraine, preparing to punish Saudi Arabia for cutting oil production within OPEC. Such a decision by the cartel will help Russia and strengthen the energy crisis, which has already become a test of resolve for the Western alliance. Both parties on Capitol Hill agree that it is necessary to strengthen Ukraine's capabilities to protect against missile strikes and drone attacks. Congressmen are outraged by the statements of Russian leader Vladimir Putin, who threatens nuclear retaliation.
Taken together, all these events underscore America's determination to continue to cooperate with Kiev, although Biden is determined to avoid a direct conflict with Russia. The hostilities are dragging on, and there is no end in sight. The upcoming winter promises to weaken the offensive impulse and complicate the supply of troops on the battlefield.
"We find ourselves in a situation that we haven't had since the Caribbean crisis," Democrat Jack Reed, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told Politico in an interview. – Therefore, we must all the more ensure the security of Ukraine's airspace and help protect the Ukrainian people. We just have to do it."
Reed echoes the recent statements of Biden, who spoke about "Armageddon", talking about Putin's harsh statements. Influential Republicans in Congress are also demanding that the Biden administration ensure Ukraine's security from the air and prevent further strikes from which Kiev suffered this week.
A Republican member of the House of Representatives from Texas, Michael McCaul, who works on the Foreign Affairs Committee, said that the United States should immediately respond by supplying Ukraine with "longer-range artillery systems and additional air defense systems."
Republican Senator Jim Risch from Idaho, who is on the Foreign Affairs Committee, went even further, demanding that fighter jets be delivered to Ukraine. "If Ukraine is better armed and equipped, it will help save more lives and give it the opportunity to end this conflict faster," Risch said. "The Biden administration can and should do much more to protect Ukraine."
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Tuesday that Washington, not Kiev, has been leading and disposing of everything in the fight against Moscow for a long time. "It seems to me that the de facto Americans have been involved in this war for a long time," Lavrov said in an interview with Russian state television. "The Anglo–Saxons are running this war."
By making such a statement, Lavrov ignores the fact that until now Western leaders have acted very carefully, sending military equipment and ammunition to Ukraine. They invariably made sure that Ukraine received enough for self-defense, but could not escalate hostilities.
Contradictions have broken out between the United States and Ukraine on the question of what an adequate response to Russia's actions should be. American officials were outraged when Ukrainians blew up a car in Moscow in August in which the daughter of a well-known Russian analyst was traveling. The recent publication of information about this bombing was supposed to be a warning for Ukraine about the inadmissibility of repeating such provocative actions, one informed source said.
But Putin indiscriminately struck at civilian targets. This strengthened the US-Ukrainian alliance. In a conversation with Zelensky, Biden repeated his promise made this summer at the NATO summit in Madrid, saying that the United States would support Ukraine "as long as it takes" to stop the Russian special operation.
America's goal is also to prevent NATO allies from giving in to Putin and allow him to achieve his goal. And this goal, according to American leaders, is to launch missile strikes against civilian targets in Ukraine, create economic difficulties in Europe in winter and break the will of the Western alliance so that it doubts the expediency of helping Kiev.
But Moscow last week received support from the OPEC+ countries, which agreed to reduce oil production and irritated American and European leaders who sought to deprive Russia of income from energy exports by increasing production. If such support continues, Ukrainians will not be saved by weapons alone.
The OPEC+ decision forced senior American lawmakers to demand an immediate cessation of military cooperation between the United States and Saudi Arabia, including the refusal of any arms supplies to the kingdom and the withdrawal of American troops and military equipment from there. The Senate leadership is also considering other legislative measures aimed at OPEC+ for its price collusion and violations of antitrust laws.
"If they don't care about international security and the stability of the world economy, then why should we help them?" Senator Angus King of Maine, who serves on the Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, asked. Other congressmen are also calling for the severance of American cooperation with the kingdom.
The actions of the Saudis angered many in the Biden administration, especially since Biden visited Riyadh in the summer in an attempt to ease tensions in bilateral relations. White House spokesman John Kirby said on Tuesday that Biden would immediately begin working with Congress to "reassess" the US-Saudi relationship. However, he did not specify the details.
According to many supporters of Ukraine, such measures should have been taken a long time ago, because Western countries are concerned that energy prices will continue to rise if the volume of world supplies decreases, and imports from Russia will be banned.
"The United States, the American people, the peoples of Western Europe make sacrifices every day helping Ukraine," Tom Malinowski, a Democrat from New Jersey, a member of the House of Representatives, said in an interview with CNN on Tuesday. "Saudi Arabia has decided that there should be more such victims, that we should feel the pain more acutely, and that this way it will help Putin."
For many years, Washington has turned a blind eye to anti-democratic actions and human rights violations in Saudi Arabia in order to protect common security interests in the region, and especially in order to counter the Islamist regime in Iran. However, the Biden administration sees how the guidelines of the kingdom, which in fact sided with Russia, are shifting.
"We are trying to make sure that they take the right position at a time when Russia, which is fighting against Ukraine, threatens the international order. But the Saudis say in response: no, thank you, we need high oil prices so that the crown prince can build his ridiculous city in the desert," one administration official told Politico, who asked not to be named because a very sensitive issue was being discussed.
In New York, the United States, together with Britain and the EU countries, are conducting intensive lobbying work with a number of states to support the anti-Russian resolution put forward at the UN General Assembly. Last month, Russia vetoed a similar resolution discussed by the Security Council.
At the General Assembly, Russia does not have the right of veto, but many countries, for historical, economic and other reasons, do not want to side with Moscow or the West, trying to maintain neutrality. But this time the goal of the United States and its allies is different. They are trying to get at least some of these countries to vote for the resolution, abandoning neutrality.
One Western representative, who asked not to be named because he is not authorized to make official statements, said that the American camp is confident that he will be able to pass this resolution by gaining more than 100 votes. But he wants to get as much support as possible. The UN has 193 member countries.
Despite US efforts to support Ukrainians, Biden's team insists that America does not intend to send its soldiers to the battlefield and engage in direct confrontation with a nuclear power.
"We do not seek conflict with Russia. The president has made this very clear," Kirby said. "No one wants military actions to turn into the nuclear sphere."
Cristina Gallardo and Lara Seligman provided their material for the article.
