Ukraine conflict: whose war is it?

10:43 . 6/12/2022 Tuesday

Abdullah Muradoğlu

Abdullah Muradoğlu graduated from Marmara University’s public administration and political science program in Istanbul. He has been active in the press and media for more than 15 years. Since 1997, he has written myriad exclusive reports, research articles, interviews, history pages, and columns for Yeni Şafak. He was deemed worthy of an award by the Journalists Association of Turkey in the 2004 Turkey Journalism Achievement Awards. He has published four biographical books and held various positions in non-governmental organizations.

Abdullah Muradoğlu

At a press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron at the White House on December 1, US President Joe Biden said: “I’m prepared to speak with Mr. Putin if in fact there is an interest in him deciding he’s looking for a way to end the war. He hasn’t done that yet.” However, Biden did not say anything about the conditions under which he would meet with Putin. Meanwhile, winter conditions are getting worse and Ukraine's energy infrastructure is about to collapse as a result of Russia's attacks. Concerns that the war will prolong are deepening.

Moreover, everyone knows that the U.S. is waging a proxy war in Ukraine. Ukraine cannot continue the war without the help of the United States. The end of the war in Ukraine is largely in the hands of the United States. Washington, on the other hand, always throws the ball to Kyiv, pretending that this is not the case.

"General Winter," seen by many as Russia's best ally, corners Europe. So much so that an article published in the New York Times included the phrase "Russia is weaponizing winter". Hard times await Europe, which is dependent on Russia for energy. Since the U.S. is rich in energy, the Europeans bear the brunt of the sanctions against Russia, of course.

Of course, there are some voices in the U.S. Congress regarding the limitation of Washington's aid to Ukraine. American hawks, on the other hand, are suggesting that Ukraine should continue the war until the last soldier and that U.S. aid should not be disrupted.

Those who propose "Realism" in international relations, especially American political scientist Prof. John Mearsheimer, argue that the policy followed by the U.S. and its supporters in Europe has thrown Russia into the arms of China. According to Mearsheimer, he plays "Russian roulette" in Western Ukraine. Stating that there are no realistic options for peace, Mearsheimer also says that Russia could use nuclear weapons, albeit with a low probability. Speaking to Freddie Sayers on YouTube, Mearsheimer said: “If the Russians use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, the West, which we are talking mainly about the United States, will not retaliate against Russia with nuclear weapons, because it will lead to a general thermonuclear war. ” he was saying

Honorary Head of Strategy at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Anthony Cordesman, on the other hand, supports hawkish policies in his article titled “United States Aid to Ukraine: An Investment Whose Benefits Greatly Exceed its Cost”. Cordesman has held influential positions in the National Security Council and NATO, as well as in the Pentagon, Department of State, and Department of Energy. According to Cordesman, it would be "strategic stupidity" to end aid to Ukraine or reduce it to ineffective levels.

As the title of his article suggests, Cordesman sees U.S. aid to war-torn Ukraine as an "investment." According to Cordesman, US expenditures are at symbolic levels compared to the economic burden brought on Russia by the Ukraine war. In his article, Cordesman openly states that the US is waging a "proxy war" with Russia in Ukraine. Cordesman admits that the European allies of the US have suffered much more than the Americans from the economic consequences of sanctions on Russia and the rise in global energy costs.

Claiming that Russia has not given any indication of negotiations, Cordesman emphasizes that the United States should be ready to increase the level of aid to Ukraine and to give Kyiv more deadly and more advanced defense systems. According to Cordesman, the “war in Ukraine” also provides invaluable insight to the United States and NATO by exposing Russia's military weaknesses.

Again, according to Cordesman, the U.S. cannot afford to lose the proxy war it is waging in Ukraine. Such a result would send a false signal to the U.S.'s allies around the world. Likewise, this proxy war will be a clear message to China about Washington's determination in the Indo-Pacific.

Cordesman points out that the economic cost of the war, which is likely to be prolonged, to Ukraine may exceed “$1 Trillion”. In other words, great troubles await Ukraine after the war. Cordesman doesn't seem to care. According to him, a “proxy war” is a situation in which the U.S., like China and Russia, will continue to make major strategic gains by weakening one of its two main threats. So, unfortunately, the light of that, prospect for peace on the horizon for Ukraine is very faint.

2 months ago
Ukraine conflict: whose war is it?
Political paganism in North European countries
The interregnum of Europe and the loneliness of Eurasia
NATO expansion: Türkiye to give red light for Sweden, green light for Finland
A warning about identity...
Quran burning sessions in pagan rituals