topics
It looks like those who warned that in the period before Trump's return to the White House on January 20, one might expect dangerous provocations to derail his pledge to end the war in Ukraine were right. According to the NYT and other media worldwide, Biden, who previously declined Zelensky's request to authorize the use of long-range missiles deep into Russia, changed his mind and now gave such permission. Currently, the White House does not confirm nor decline media reports to this effect, but even official silence is a dangerous indicator.
Biden played a significant role in the Ukrainian tragedy when he, as Vice-President under Obama, coordinated the February 2014 regime change coup to bring a pro-NATO government selected by then Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland. This policy was in line with turning Ukraine into an anti-Russia beachhead and has been Washington’s project since the end of WWII.
Presently, as French LeMond notes sarcastically, Biden faces the reality of the “sand quickly emptying in the hourglass since he has only a few weeks left to consolidate the gains of his mandate before Donald Trump returns to the White House. “President-elect has often criticized the scale of U.S. financial and military aid to Ukraine and is vehemently opposed to its escalation, but there is not much he can do before January 20. Congress, where Republicans have a majority in both chambers, could step in and demand sanity given Russia’s pledge to a strong response not only against Ukraine but the manufacturers of these missiles. Some members of Congress made reasonable and logical statements against the escalation. Still, there are some, even congressional Republicans, who have urged Biden to loosen the rules on how Ukraine can use NATO weapons. The U.S. is deeply divided, and now, as Trump is assembling his team to “Make America Great Again,” besides some welcoming signs of civility like the Biden-Trump conversation in the White House (pictured), there are no visible indications of healing.
There is a bitter battle going on in the U.S. behind the scenes that threatens further divisions and repercussions around the world.
There is a bitter fight in Congress, think tanks, the media, and other less visible circles sawing seeds of further divisions by working behind the scenes. Unfortunately, the intensity of such divisions in times of global upheavals has consequences worldwide. Wars, terrorism, narcotraffic, climate change, hunger, pandemics, exotic ones like incoming asteroids or UFO guests. The list can continue, and one would assume that any responsible leaders would be interested in reviving international dialogue to face global challenges. The outgoing Biden administration failed dramatically to do that, leading instead to further divisions in America and the world. Trump accuses Biden of provoking nuclear war and promises to reverse this process, but whether or not he knows how or is capable of achieving this is a big question. Still, at least it gives us some breathing space, that is if the remaining two months until the President-elect takes the reins of government into his own hands, the outgoing Biden administration or any other foul players ruin Trump’s agenda.
What gives us additional hope is the attitude of the American public, which, contrary to the polls, expectations of a long wait for election results, and the vast anti-Trump machinery of Democrats and bipartisan Deep State, he won in a landslide. Foreign Affairs had to admit that it is time to accept the reality, stop talking about American “Exceptionalism” or “Indispensability,” and that “Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement will define U.S. foreign policy at least for the next four years.” Trump wants to concentrate on resolving the avalanche of domestic problems, cutting deals with adversaries, reducing tensions in global trouble spots, and allowing him to focus inward.
At a recent international conference dedicated to finding good ideas to revive the global dialogue in times of crisis, some Western scholars received welcoming applause after they suggested to Trump that the previous divide-and-rule foreign policy paradigm be replaced with win-win negotiations with groups like BRICS+ or the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). A good start would be Summit Yalta 2.0 between Trump, Xi, and Putin, as suggested by the close to Republicans Washington Times‘ two op-eds.
Finally, in the morning of November 20, the White House, State Department, and Pentagon declined to comment about Biden’s permission to fire long-range missiles into Russia. Western media enthusiasm is also waning. Whether this was another example of NYT fakes or Biden’s handlers’ change of mind is still being determined. Still, the next two months will be challenging for our nervous systems.
