As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine enters its third week, there is still no sign that the Biden administration is attempting high-level diplomacy with Moscow as a way to possibly end the fighting.
The Washington Post reported on Thursday that the Biden administration doesn’t see the conflict ending anytime soon and that its current strategy is to impose economic pain on Russia and support Ukraine’s military “in its effort to inflict as many defeats on Russia as possible.”
It’s clear at this point that the Western sanctions were factored into Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to attack Ukraine as they haven’t done anything to deter him. But US officials still say they are in no rush to engage directly with Putin.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken claimed that in the months leading up to the invasion, the US gave Putin “possible off-ramps.” But during the negotiations, the US ignored Putin’s key demands. Putin wanted a guarantee that Ukraine wouldn’t ever join NATO, and even though President Biden said Kyiv wouldn’t be joining the military alliance anytime soon, the US refused to make the promise.
Now, Russia has said it will stop its assault if Ukraine declares neutrality, recognizes Crimea as Russian territory, and recognizes the independence of the breakaway Donbas republics. Instead of supporting negotiations on these terms that could lead to a potential ceasefire, the US is working with its NATO allies to flood weapons into Ukraine.
Blinken said on Wednesday that the Biden administration expects “a strategic defeat” of Russia in Ukraine despite Moscow’s “short-term” gains. “We’ll accomplish this by backing Ukrainians in their fight, by remaining united in holding Russia accountable through the devastating sanctions, the diplomatic isolation and other measures,” Blinken said.
While Blinken says the US expects a Russian defeat in Ukraine, Biden officials told the Post that they don’t see a “clear end to the military phase of this conflict,” meaning the US expects a long, bloody insurgency in Ukraine, and is willing to support it.
I’ve really learned to hate my own government over this conflict. The more I learn about it, the more I despise U.S. foreign policy and the conflicts it always starts.
You have that right. I hate my own government more every day. And we think that we’re the “exceptional” nation. What delusions Americans have.
Put up your dukes! I wanna give you a hug!
Same here. Now you know why Che came about 60 years ago and today,even more relative…
This was the most decorated american officer pre-ww2: https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
Que Viva Che!
one of my most favored heroes…i called him; a Gandhi with a gun; This is the heading of my twitter account and it was taken from a letter he wrote his kidsv from africa: “Above all, always be capable of feeling deeply any injustice committed against anyone, anywhere in the world.”
U.S. foreign policy has sucked for years, possibly because of our lack of diplomats. Blinken is just another U.S. “diplomat” who can’t see things from the other guy’s point of view and, therefore, since we’re right and you’re wrong there is no need for serious discussion. That’s the problem when one becomes the worlds absolutely greatest nation that ever was.
Peace and honest negotiations is the only sane answer. Woe be to the warmongers.
The warmongers can kiss my backside!
Thid sounds as is somebidy is begging Biden to something. I think be has already done enough. The mess created in Ukraine wilk take some time cleaning up.
My concern, Bianca, is that sometimes these kinds of situations set off on their own, in a perpetual motion…
US diplomacys aim here precisely is to tie EU to the US and stop the natural drift to integration with the Russia/China bloc. Ukraine is just a sacrificial pawn in that great game. The issue is when will Ukraine wake up and when will EU peoples get tired of their US dominated pols?
As everyone has been saying all along, “The US will fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.” “Diplomacy” is not part of that calculation.
“Now, Russia has said it will stop its assault if Ukraine declares neutrality, recognizes Crimea as Russian territory, and recognizes the independence of the breakaway Donbas republics.”
I want to remind everyone that those three conditions are not the sum of the conditions Russia wants.
In addition, it wants “de-militarization” of Ukraine and “de-Nazification” of Ukraine. Russia may stop shooting at Ukrainian soldiers if Ukraine agrees to the first three and the soldiers lay down their arms. the “de-militarization” part is ongoing, obviously, but if Ukraine surrenders, that will put on hold until later when the Ukrainian government is re-oriented.
The “de-Nazification” on the other hand will continue regardless. The neo-Nazi battalions will be wiped out. Russia will demand a Constitution banning the neo-Nazi parties and militias and will insure that it gets that.
I do not believe American government propaganda about this war, nor do I believe this Russian propaganda about “denazification”
this war is an aggression. I have no problem labelling it as such, informed and impressed when the Russian foreign minister labeled our war (nato, I guess) against Libya as “aggression against a state.” That for me was credibility-building. this war is way past the neighboring provinces with persecuted countrymen. machines of death are active in populated areas. this is a disaster. shame on US for just seeing a chance to sell more weapons, rather than have diplomacy and peace efforts. But, the other side of the coin is, would our diplomats even offer any help, or just be so foul as to make the matter worse? US may have forfeited ALL credibility against Russia. maybe we can use our leverage with Pussy Riot to start diplomacy LOL. Seriously, what have we gained over constant saber rattling and bad manners against Russians for decades?
There is no comparison between this operation and Libya. Libya was on false pretenses – there was no pending “massacre” in eastern Libya. There is an ongoing massacre in Donbass to this day. In addition, Libya posed no threat to the US. Ukraine in NATO posed a threat to Russia.
I view the ‘denazification’ talk as mostly Russian propaganda. The lawyer from Philadelphia who commented earlier is correct, that there is a long history of fractious ethno-nationalism in the entire area. Ukraine, Poland, Moldova, and Russia (maybe Finland and the Baltic countries too) have many ethnic, religious, and linguistic groups within them. Diversity is not necessarily strength. Instead, it can be a nightmare to govern.
The US should NOT be stirring the pot by fomenting every-color-of-the rainbow revolutions and neo-liberal ideology there (or anywhere else).
Nope. The Russians are very serious about that “de-Nazification”. They lost 27 million people in WWII and when Zelensky talked about Ukraine getting nukes, the idea of “Nazis with nukes” was too much for Russia.
The Washington Post reported on Thursday that the Biden administration doesn’t see the conflict ending anytime soon and that its current strategy is to impose economic pain on Russia and support Ukraine’s military “in its effort to inflict as many defeats on Russia as possible.”
And they say Putin is evil.
The verbiage is frightening… I hate to sound repetitive, but this line of thinking can cause things to escalate. The Biden administration, is either deluded or living in lala land…
I wish Biden would negotiate right over Zelensky’s head! Zelensky won’t (or can’t–if he fears for his life!) make the deal. Biden should make it instead. Deal is: US recognizes Russian Crimea and the two breakaway republics, UN sponsored and monitored referenda on nationality of other Russian speaking areas of Ukraine, US pledges to NOT to expand NATO into Ukraine (and no cutesy poo “partnerships,” “joint exercises,” blah, blah, blah, either). Russia agrees that Ukrainian state and even regime are not to be overthrown, and pulls back military from Kyev pending those referenda; both US and Russia agree to respect Ukrainian military neutrality (it can join the EU, if it wants to and if the EU will have it….which is questionable) and territorial integrity (with the exceptions noted above). And that’s it. Zelensky and Ukraine, and the Ukranian extreme ethno nationalists, can like it or lump it. But no more US money, other goodies, for Ukraine, unless the official government goes along with neutrality, the loss of the Crimea and the breakaways, and the referenda, and agrees to not pursue WMD.
Sounds to me like a perfectly fair deal. Everyone wins except the neo Nazi element in Ukraine.
Zelensky was encouraged by the US to take his hard line positions. He is now encouraged to maintain them.
It is the same as happened in Georgia in 2008.
Ukraine’s real mistake was trusting the US, when it developed its positions. They could have avoided war, by keeping a safe distance from NATO.
Meh. “Encouraged.” Zelensky had no NATO guarantee. As you suggest, Georgia should have been a good lesson. As should Moldova. NATO won’t come running to protect a non NATO former component of the USSR from Russia. Ukraine itself had already experienced this, in terms of Crimea and the breakaway Republics. The USA fomented an anti Russian coup in Kyev, and the breakaway Donbas and the Russian taking of the peninsula were the result. And the USA did nothing about it, in terms of providing actual, direct military assistance to Ukraine in winning back these territories. Why would Zelensky expect acquiescence on Russia’s part when he started making nuclear and NATO noises? And why would he expect more than he is already getting from NATO?
“Georgia should have been a good lesson.”
That is what comes of being led first by self aggrandizing crooks, and then by a comedian.
All of them were treated as heroic by the US, so long as they were compliant in all the US wanted.
Certainly the US deserves some of the blame, but, at some point, aren’t these former Soviet area polities and populations responsible for their own actions? They may be doing what the USA wants, and the USA may butter them up for doing it, but the USA has shown that it will not back them in a war with Russia. So, I have to assume it is what they want, too. Anti Russsian nationalism is prevalent throughout the entire former USSR, and even beyond. And extreme ethno nationalism is the norm in such places as well. Poland, Hungary, the Baltic states, even the former GDR part of Germany, and Russia itself, as well as Ukraine, all have irredentists, maximalist nationalist aspects to their politics. And, given the history, every state in the region can (and does!) bitch about having “lost” some territory that it held in the past. Cities, provinces and whole regions have changed national flags there a dozen times in the lifetime of one person! Crook, comedian, whatever, the leaders are not completely divorced from the led. With Zelensky, one gets the impression that he is the one being “led,” and that is the hard core Ukranian nationalists/neo Nazis who are doing the “leading” (or, rather, the threatening).
Merkel and Mitterand actively supported independence for the two breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine. Putin was okay with this, and voiced no plans for Novorussia then. The people in Luhansk and Donatsk had a supervised election and voted for their independence, but Ukraine-backed US didn’t recognize it. As for Crimea, Kruschev gave that as a ‘gift’ to Ukraine from Russia when it hardly mattered, in the 1950s, as it was all USSR back then.
You’re right: there was no reason for Zelensky to expect US-facilitated ‘expedited’ acceptance (as he put it) into NATO or the EU.
Refusing to do diplomacy is how the US got this war going. Of course it is how the US will keep it going.
When the files are opened one day, we’ll find a choice for war. Now, all we can see is that the choices and actions are all those that one would choose if one wanted a war.
Meanwhile, the Ukrainian military continues to be trashed. From Southfront…
Blinken, let’s see the videos and transcripts of all those negotiations with the Russians!