Ukraine’s Future – OpEd

By

Reality has increasingly sunk in as US establishment foreign policy talking heads Jeffrey Goldberg (on PBS) and Fareed Zakaria (on CNN) prop the neocon leaning likes of Anne Applebaum and Kori Schake, to promote further armed support for the Kiev regime. Omitted from such discussion are the likes of Oleksii Arestovych, a former aide of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Arestovych recently stated that Ukraine bet on the wrong horse by noting how Russia has prevailed in not being weakened and globally isolated by the actions of the collective West. He noted the great reception Russian President Vladimir Putin received during his recent visits to the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. 

It’s very telling that Putin’s latest travels weren’t (at least for the most part) covered on the prime-time aired US half hour TV news programs. Many Americans continue to be fooled by the mass media that they heavily rely on. Shown Friday evenings on PBS, the Goldberg hosted Washington Week with The Atlantic comes to mind.

Contrary to what he said on his December 8 show, the Russian armed forces have gotten stronger since the February 24, 2022 start of Russia’s special military operation. The same can’t be said of the Kiev regime armed forces. Likewise, Goldberg’s guest Applebaum is off the mark for believing that the Kiev regime’s failure is the result of insufficient Western support. She’s also disingenuous for downplaying the large-scale Kiev regime military losses which are far greater than Russia’s.  (A more accurate comparative accounting of the losses will be better established at the end of the conflict.)

Goldberg should refer back to what the US President Barack Obama said to him in 2016 on why the collective West couldn’t prevail over Russia on the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR. Along with Russia having a logistical advantage, Ukraine means a lot more to Moscow than the neocon likes of Lindsey Graham, who’re okay with the idea of fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian.

Making more sense than Goldberg, Zakaria, Schake and Applebaum is the input of Lawrence Wilkerson and Aaron Mate. They’ve expressed a view that was said to me by a friend: “Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has been illegal, immoral, and wrong, but not unprovoked.” 

I’ve yet to get a response to my question – what other choice did he have? He waited seven years for the Minsk Accords to be implemented. During that time, NATO built up the Kiev regime forces as there was open talk of a Croat Operation Storm like action. The Kiev regime, Germans and French acknowledged that the Minsk Accords were never intended to be implemented. In the weeks leading up to February 24, 2022, OSCE observers noted an increase in Kiev regime shelling on the rebel held Donbass area. The limited Russian military action brought the Kiev regime to the negotiating table where an agreement was thwarted by neocon-neolib advocate Boris Johnson, who suckered the Kiev regime to fight on for a supposedly better end result.

The eventual outcome of the NATO proxy war against Russia is clear. The issues are exactly when will it end and the boundaries of Ukraine. There will be no NATO membership for Ukraine. As discussed by Brian Berletic, the silly notions of a Kiev regime victory serve to prolong the agony.

Following the Stalingrad and Kursk battles, it became evident who would win WW II. Nonetheless, there was still a good amount of fighting. Allied forces took heavy casualties in the final months of European theater fighting. 

The Kiev regime presently appears to have enough zealots and misguided others to fight on. On more than one occasion, I recall Mark Sleboda saying that many Ukrainians will have a prolonged grudge against Russia. 

Time can heal. The US and its allies killed many German and Japanese civilians and armed combatants. Yet in a relatively short amount of time, Americans and their allies were secure when walking the streets of Tokyo and Berlin. The Russia-Kiev regime conflict isn’t the overly simplistic good/bad guy situation as has been suggestively depicted.

Running counter to that observation is Fareed Zakaria’s one-sidedly feeble-minded advocacy (shared by some others) to have frozen Russian assets pay for Ukraine’s reconstruction. And what of the collective West, which instigated and prolonged the proxy war? The renowned Ivy league political economist Jeffrey Sachs provides an excellent deconstruction on how heavy-handed US approaches are in the long run working against American interests.

Beware of what some US foreign policy elites say about Russia. This past June, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: “The Kremlin often claimed it had the second strongest military in the world — and many believed it. Today, many see Russia’s military as the second strongest in Ukraine.” Now, some US elites are spinning the idea that a Russian victory will lead to further Russian advances westward.

As I’ve discussed in prior commentary, Russia is neither a weak county unable to defend its legitimate interests, nor a country bent on an aggressive imperial military conquest. Unfortunately, the current American president and his foreign policy team seem unwilling to dramatically change course. The world awaits the outcome of the next US presidential election.

Michael Averko

Michael Averko is a New York based independent foreign policy analyst and media critic. He has appeared as a guest commentator on the BBC, RT and WABC talk radio, in addition to having been a panelist at the World Russia Forum, Russia Forum New York and US-Russia.org Experts' Panel. Besides Averko's Eurasia Review column - Academia.edu, Counterpunch, Foreign Policy Journal, Global Research, History News Network, InoSMI.Ru, Johnson's Russia List, Journal of Turkish Weekly, Kyiv Post, Oriental Review, Penza News, Pravda.Ru, Pravoslavie.Ru, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Russia Insider, Sputnik News, Strategic Culture Foundation, The Duran, The Huffington Post, Valdai Discussion Club, Yonkers Tribune and WikiLeaks, are among the numerous venues where his articles have either appeared or been referenced. The American Institute in Ukraine and the Lord Byron Foundation for Balkan Studies, have referenced some of Averko's articles, along with academic white papers prepared for NATO Watch, Ohio State University, Problems of Post-Communism and the Royal College of Defence Studies. He has been referenced in the Council on Foreign Relations, Defense One and The New York Times. Averko is source referenced in Richard Sakwa's book "Frontline Ukraine". His Eurasia Review article on Pavlo Skoropadsky, provides the first full online English language transcript of Skoropadsky's edict calling for an "All-Russian Federation", inclusive of Russia and Ukraine. Among other issues, that article explains the relationships among the major combatants in the Russian Civil War. He can be reached via [email protected]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *