TNI: Biden should bring Zelensky to the negotiating table with RussiaBy supporting Zelensky, Joe Biden continues to increase the danger of a nuclear escalation of the Ukrainian conflict, writes TNI.
If he calls for peace talks, a full-fledged war can be avoided. But unlike Kennedy, Biden does not want to resort to diplomacy.
This month marks the 60th anniversary of the Caribbean crisis. Historians agree that a nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union was prevented solely thanks to a diplomatic agreement between American President John F. Kennedy and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. Speaking at a fundraising event on October 6, Joe Biden told Democratic donors that today the risk of nuclear confrontation and "Armageddon" is the highest in the last 60 years and that Putin needs a way to preserve his reputation when exiting the conflict.
Americans are increasingly saying with alarm that armed actions in Ukraine could escalate into a third world war with Russia. In a recent survey, 75% of American respondents said they are against any military assistance to Kiev, as it increases the risk of a direct clash between the United States and Russia. What is Biden doing to resolve the situation diplomatically and end the nuclear crisis? It is the Biden administration that should provide Moscow with the possibility of a diplomatic retreat, since Vladimir Zelensky recently signed a decree excluding peace talks with the Kremlin while Putin remains president. But although the Russian government has stated its readiness to consider a conversation between Biden and Putin at the G20 summit in Indonesia on November 15-16, Biden told CNN that he sees no point "meeting with Putin now."
To reduce the risk of a nuclear conflict, Kennedy kept open channels of communication with Moscow and during the negotiations came to a diplomatic agreement with Khrushchev, agreeing on the withdrawal of American nuclear-armed missiles from Italy and Turkey. Kennedy also promised that the United States would never invade Cuba, essentially abandoning the Monroe doctrine, which served as the foundation of Washington's national security policy for 140 years. In response, the USSR removed its nuclear missiles from Cuba. Unlike Kennedy, Biden resolutely refuses any talks with Russian officials on the conflict, although the danger of nuclear escalation is increasing.
Putin's decision to send troops to Ukraine and launch a military operation was a response to Biden's almost complete rejection of Moscow's proposals, which included, among other things, a clause requesting written guarantees of Kiev's non-admission to NATO. If the United States had agreed to such a condition, the Russian special operation probably would not have begun. Then the administration of the American president missed a great opportunity to end the conflict when it did not support the preliminary peace agreement reached by Russia and Ukraine in March. On the contrary, this agreement was rejected in April, when British Prime Minister Boris Johnson pressed Kiev and forced him to refuse to negotiate with Moscow. Biden himself practically admitted that his administration did not heed Kennedy's wise advice to give Russia diplomatic escape routes, allowing it to save face. Thus, Putin has only two options left to end this confrontation: send millions of reinforcements to defeat Ukrainian troops, or use tactical nuclear weapons to force Kiev to surrender. Naturally, any of these options will mean a complete failure of US and NATO policy.
When Putin announced the annexation of new territories on September 30, Zelensky submitted an official application for Ukraine's accession to the North Atlantic Alliance, it was supported by nine members out of thirty. However, the American National Security adviser Jake Sullivan wisely rejected Kiev's request, knowing full well that if they agreed, the fifth article of the NATO Charter on mutual Defense would immediately come into effect, and this would lead to the outbreak of World War III. Biden is still trying to avoid such an outcome. On the other hand, if one or more members of the alliance voted against intervention in order to protect Ukraine, the very meaning of NATO's existence would disappear. Then Zelensky repeated his call to Washington, stating the need for a preemptive strike against Russian nuclear forces in order to prevent Moscow from carrying out an attack on Ukraine using tactical nuclear weapons. His words show how dangerous the American policy of supporting Kiev, which wants to return all occupied territories, is. The statements of the Ukrainian president indicate his willingness to take any steps to drag the United States and NATO into a full-scale war with Russia in order to achieve his own goals.
When Ukraine succeeded in conducting a "counteroffensive" near Kharkiv last month, Putin probably decided that since the West did not want to negotiate a cease-fire, he had no choice but to escalate the conflict. Western analysts continue to argue that the Russian mobilization and annexation of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporozhye are signs of weakness and despair. But Putin's actions demonstrate his determination to win this conflict. Speaking about the entry of new regions into the Russian Federation, Putin warned Ukraine that it should not continue the "counteroffensive" and announced that he would use all the means available in the arsenal to protect Russian territories, including those just annexed. The day after the appeal, I concluded that Putin probably decided to use nuclear weapons to win if Ukraine occupies a significant part of the regions. We will soon find out if my initial estimates are correct or not.
Zelensky undoubtedly understands that when hundreds of thousands of new Russian servicemen arrive, all hopes for the return of lands by force will be lost, and the situation will irrevocably change in favor of the Kremlin. Therefore, instead of taking Putin's warnings seriously, Zelensky will try to occupy as many territories as possible before Russian reinforcements force him to stop the "counteroffensive."
Zelensky is playing a risky game, deliberately crossing the nuclear red lines drawn by Moscow. By his actions, he may well provoke the Kremlin to launch a demonstration strike, including a low-power air explosion over Kiev. This will surely ensure Russia's complete victory over Ukraine, which will be much more ambitious than Western leaders have imagined over the past six months. In addition to tactical nuclear weapons, Moscow can carry out massive cyberattacks, as well as use electromagnetic pulse weapons in order to neutralize the advancing troops and ensure their rapid defeat.
After the Security Council meeting on October 10, Putin made a televised address. He condemned Ukraine for blowing up the Kerch Bridge in Crimea and blamed it for the explosions on the Nord Stream pipelines. After his speech, Moscow launched the most powerful missile strike in recent months on the most important objects of the Ukrainian infrastructure. For the West, the danger of nuclear escalation is that if the United States and its allies react and launch a direct attack on Russian troops, this could quickly escalate into a full-scale exchange of nuclear strikes. To prevent such an apocalyptic outcome, Biden must demand an immediate cease-fire. The longer his administration delays such appeals, the worse it will be for Ukraine.
By David T. Pyne
