The Republicans are back in control of Congress and the war drums are louder already. The US has opted for in-your-face regime change in Syria, largely dropping the fig-leaf of an anti-ISIS “air campaign” and openly recruiting for fighters to take down the legal Assad government. We always knew the ISIS crap was just that. ISIS was the Obama Administration’s Osama bin Laden, our creation, and we aren’t even trying that hard to defeat them in Syria and Iraq. America only wants that military opening it needed to contrive some reason to get on with the damned “air campaign.” I was pretty convinced that was the game after the US had to be dragged away, kicking and screaming, from a bombing war against Syria over chemical weapons even when Syria conceded the terms. The US was never satisfied, and always warning that bombing might be necessary. Now it’s marauding inside Syria without so much as a “may I?” to the Syrian government, able to ship weapons around at will, able to arm a bigger proxy army against Assad. It is all utterly disgusting. Why is it that everybody can see what is going on in this country, and so few care? Don’t Americans realize what they look like more and more abroad? A brute with a big military machine.
I’d really like to know all the ins and outs of this US obsession with a man (it is always one man, never a people or country) that Hillary Clinton had declared okey-doke not long before she put out the contract on him. Of course Saudi Arabia has its oily paws in there, and so does Turkey with its own time-bombs ticking in the form of ethnic rebellion. But what is in it for America? I hesitate to say O – I – L but I bet most people don’t.
Okay, so the Mideast is on fire and getting worse, as the US promises air campaigns to the left and to the right to stop the flames. But in Europe, things are if anything worse. True, nobody is beheading anybody, but the re-armament of Russia is well underway on all fronts. The US, EU and NATO are digging themselves ever deeper into the business of west Ukraine in the hopes of capturing pro-Russian east Ukraine and its riches and its delicious proximity to Russia itself. In response, Russia has ever more overtly sent in its military equipment and personnel to support the east Ukrainian separatists. The West itself precipitated these radical developments in Ukraine by making existential threats against Moscow. Ukraine should never have been included by NATO as expansion territory, not even as a Partner for Peace, aka Junior NATO. Russia’s top officials have now openly warned America that if the US moves to provide lethal weapons to west Ukraine it will be a game-changer. It stands ready to do more, including moving in missiles (I would guess) and elements of the Army itself. If it does so, it will take everything it needs as it moves, including roads, bridges and airports.
Russia has also moved to more active engagement with Georgia’s two separatist regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The two regions broke away from Tbilisi in the early 1990s with some Russian help and have existed as independent entities under Russian protection since then. A Georgian effort to recapture one of these regions by force in a rather pitiful “blitzkrieg” sent a spike through international nerves in 2008, when Russia struck back, sent the Georgian Army running, and officially recognized the independence of both regions. Annexation by Russia may now be the only safe haven now for these two national groups.
Russia’s responses to NATO policies and actions is absolutely logical, they were predictable, and they were predicted. And to what end? Why is the US seeking constant eastward expansion toward Russian borders, knowing from a simple reading of history that this is the trigger for war? Now Henry Kissinger, one of America’s greatest diplomats, has given an interview to a German newspaper in which he laments the West’s actions in Ukraine and its failure to recognize the peril of trying to expand into an area of extraordinary Russian interests and historical importance. Kissinger suggested that Ukraine should be removed from NATO’s ambit entirely. On trade, that is another matter and Ukraine should be free to trade with whom it chooses.
Again, to whose benefit all of this confrontation and permanent warfare? Weapons manufacturers? NGOs distributing disaster relief? International bureaucracies? Deep pockets? A fellow blogger points out that there are oil interests in eastern Ukraine now that science has shown us how to suck up every ounce of oil within the earth through fracking (and remember that Ukraine has a part claim on the Black Sea resources, too). He suggests that perhaps groups led by such people as Joe Biden’s son might have an interest in a military solution that secured east Ukraine’s natural resources for international sharing. One thing is for sure: it is not happening to make you and me safer, or to bring democracy to a kleptocracy. There are money interests there, under all the pony poop.