Just a few weeks ago, American citizens expressed their views about the current government and its policies.
Their decision was a big, fat “No”.
No to the old ways.
No to the Democrats’ overreach in gender politics, economics, or foreign policy.
Incoming president Donald Trump wowed to change it all: even if it is an exaggeration, he promised to end the war in 24.
Instead of going down quietly and with dignity, outgoing president Joe Biden and his administration chose a different path, especially in Ukraine. Fighting until their dying breath to make it impossible, but at least difficult for the Trump administration to quickly end the war.
It started with Secretary of State Antony Blinken declaring that the Biden administration was working to send as much military aid as possible to Ukraine while it could – hoping to help to Kyiv to reach a point from which it was “able to negotiate a peace from a position of strength”. A new, roughly $275 million military aid package was also announced, along with a plan to forgive about $4.7 billion in U.S. loans to Ukraine.
Then came the authorization to fire long-range missiles into Russian territory, then the permission to use anti-personnel mines in Eastern Ukraine. A clear reversal of Biden’s previous policy to “curtail the use of anti-personnel mines worldwide”.
In due course, Ukraine launched its first cross-border strike first with the American-made ATACMS, then with the British-made Storm Shadow missiles.
Policy shifts that seemed impossible just months ago – officially motivated by Russia’s changing tactics on the frontline, but threatening with a spiral of escalation that might be impossible to stop. Steps that were not taken for months in spite of repeated urgings from Kyiv – exactly because Washington feared that they could lead to escalation.
Now, with only two months in office, President Biden decided to go all in.
Experts agree that neither the long-range missiles, nor the anti-personnel mines can change the course of the war or help Ukraine to a decisive win.
The best they can achieve is to slow down the advancement of Russian troops. Even top U.S. generals admit that Ukraine’s dreams of ejecting every last Russian soldier from its territory is overly ambitious, as Russia holds over 110,000 square kilometres of Ukrainian territory – that’s about 18 percent of the country.
Russia reacted on each occasion as expected: promising retaliation and more involvement.
At first, Russia launched a missile, that was first thought to be an ICBM, just to turn out to be a new, shorter-range type of missile capable of carrying nuclear warhead.
Then, President Putin approved Russia’s revised nuclear doctrine, lowering the threshold at which Russia would consider using nuclear weapons. A small, but significant addendum also expanded what Moscow considered an attack from a nuclear state: that is, an attack from a non-nuclear state backed by a nuclear power.
Hence, any Ukrainian attack supported by the US can be considered as a justification for answering with nuclear weapons. “We consider ourselves entitled to use our weapons against the military facilities of those countries that allow their weapons to be used against our facilities”, President Putin announced.
If anything, the closure of the U.S. embassy in Kyiv is a proof that the Biden administration considered those remarks to be more than just an empty threat.
For now, the embassy was just closed and reopened, but it might not happen the same the next time. Luckily for the Americans, they can leave when things turn truly dangerous: exactly the way they did it in Saigon or Kabul.
Airlifting personnel and valuables.
Leaving behind their (once) allies, aides and helpers, to deal with the disastrous consequences of Washington’s decisions.
And the best thing?
It’s like killing two birds with one stone.
Because it will be the Republicans who’d bear the consequences, no matter what.
The only real change that might come is that it would be more difficult to achieve peace, preventing Trump from posing as peacemaker (but at least making it more difficult for him to do so) and prolonging a conflict Ukraine can’t win.
