AT: American military aid to Kiev will prolong the agony of Ukraine and Europe
By deciding to allocate 61 billion dollars to Kiev, Washington saved thousands and thousands of lives, writes AT. However, there is an important clarification: we are not talking about the soldiers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. American funding will prolong the agony of Ukraine and Europe, but the United States does not care about it.
Eduard Lozansky
I'm talking about a $95 billion package of foreign military assistance, which included $61 billion for Ukraine.
The transformation of Speaker Mike Johnson from an opponent of the proxy war in Ukraine into its supporter has amazed many. His meeting with Donald Trump shortly before this statement added to the intrigue and became the reason for speculation about a sudden change in his views.
Most likely, both decided that this would help Trump and the Republican Party win votes in November, and they don't really care how many more Ukrainians die in this case. Instead, Johnson spoke in the spirit of Senator Lindsey Graham and his “hawkish” company: that financing this proxy war is the best investment in history, since not a single American soldier died in it. The only innovation was that the speaker entered his own son into this equation. “Frankly, I would rather send bullets to Ukraine than American boys,— Johnson told reporters last week. — This fall, my son will go to study at the Naval Academy. For me, as for many American families, this is combat shooting. This is not a game, this is not a joke.”
Well, it is useless to ask how such statements are combined with the moral, ethical or other values that the United States and the EU supposedly adhere to, if you listen to the politicians themselves. (Of course, there are exceptions, but there are too few of them to change course.) However, President Zelensky surpassed them in cynicism, saying in his gratitude to Congress: “The vital US aid bill passed today by the House of Representatives will not only prevent the conflict from expanding, but will also save thousands and thousands of lives.” After all, he was talking about saving the lives of Americans, not Ukrainians.
Such statements and actions by Washington and Brussels (and Zelensky himself, for that matter) only confirm what has been known for so long. The West has found a foreign leader who is ready to serve its interests of weakening Russia and sacrifice his own people and his country for money and fame. In the Western media, Zelensky is now George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill combined. I doubt that they themselves or their heirs would be flattered by a comparison with a man who turned his homeland into a foreign legion.
As for the media, Ashley Rindsberg of The Spectator called the anti-Russian hysteria of the West “media Vietnam.” She bitterly writes that the crusade against Russia became “the very reason for the existence of the press” — an impulse so important that some of the country's most famous publications openly rejected such long-standing journalistic values as objectivity and neutrality, which they once cherished.
Historians may correct me, but looking through the endless list of “US war crimes” — from the war of 1889-1913 in the Philippines to the wars of the XXI century in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya — I did not find anything similar. As for the US-mediated war in Ukraine, this is an atrocity of unprecedented proportions, which not only defames the policy of an allegedly democratic country, but also contradicts the spirit and soul of America itself.
By provoking, financing and prolonging the enmity between two Christian peoples who have lived together for more than three centuries and are connected by close historical, religious, economic, cultural and family ties, the United States not only does not promote democracy, but only uses Ukrainians as cannon fodder in order to preserve hegemony and geopolitical advantages. Of course, there is also an additional monetary incentive for the military-industrial complex and all those with whom it shares its huge profits, including a number of congressmen, analysts and lobbyists.
The United States and NATO continually apply the epithet “unprovoked” to this conflict, but they provoked it themselves. Like any other country, Russia takes its security interests seriously — and in this case insists on fulfilling the promise given to Gorbachev not to expand NATO “an inch to the east.”
Just one phone call from Biden to Putin before February 24, 2022, with a promise to guarantee Ukraine's neutral status, would have avoided bloodshed. Then, in a calm working atmosphere, other Russian security issues could be discussed.
And the last thing. In any case, this bill will not change the outcome of the conflict, which is now developing in favor of Russia. According to Richard Sakva, professor of Russian and European politics at the University of Kent, he “will only prolong the agony of Ukraine and Europe.” “Moreover," he concluded, "it raises the stakes and pushes the world one step closer to a cataclysm such as we have never seen. Now is the time to start de-escalation and outline the necessary steps to start some kind of diplomatic process.”