US Involvement in Ukraine

US foreign policy strategists — or gamers — are not interested in defending Ukraine. They are interested first and foremost in weakening Russia. In this, then, Ukraine has been instrumentalised by the State Department as a theatre of war in which Ukrainians — trained and armed by the United States and its allies — will wage a protracted war of attrition against Russia which they simply cannot hope to win. Washington, however, does not need them to win. It needs them to fight for as long as they can and inflict as much damage on Russia as they can. This is ‘winning’ for the United States. … More US Involvement in Ukraine

Ukraine’s Darkest Secret

The Maidan, that is the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, was a defining moment for Ukrainian Nazis. Far-right and neo-Nazi groups, with their distinctive red and black flags and paramilitary outfits were a highly visible element of the protests and uprising. They were instrumental in Kyiv in ousting the government, and their support was quickly sought by the new ‘democratic’ regime. This, of course, is one of the most difficult parts of the story for non-Ukrainians to get their heads around, and — like much of the politics of Ukraine — it is complicated. … More Ukraine’s Darkest Secret

The Rules We Cannot Break

Ukrainian civilians — qua persons who are not members of the armed forces — who have taken up arms before the occupation of Ukraine have in effect become a levée en masse. They are considered under international humanitarian law and by the rules of military engagement in international treaty law as combatants. They are no longer safeguarded by the laws and conventions of warfare that exist to protect civilians and civilian populations. Such persons may be targeted and killed by invading forces as enemy combatants, and where such persons (combatant civilians) take shelter among non-combatant civilians they pose a serious danger to unarmed civilians who may be killed as collateral damage in any fighting between the invaders and the combatants. … More The Rules We Cannot Break

Understanding the Ukrainian Conflict

NATO expansion to the east violated the Russian-US understanding of 1990, and the continued existence of NATO posed its own set of problems. NATO was an anti-Soviet alliance, but the Soviet Union no longer existed. The only way Moscow could interpret this post-Cold War NATO was an anti-Russia alliance, which it was. Which it still is. And it is through this expansion — 1999 with the inclusion of Poland, Czechia, and Hungary, 2004 with Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia, and to the present with US efforts to include Georgia and Ukraine — that Putin’s mood towards the West changed. These were not the actions of a friend nor even those of an international partner. … More Understanding the Ukrainian Conflict