The timeline of Trump's ties with Russia lines up with allegations of conspiracy and misconduct
The timeline of Trump's ties with Russia lines up with allegations of conspiracy and misconductA dossier of unverified claims alleges serious conspiracy and misconduct in the final months of the 2016 presidential campaign. The White House has dismissed the dossier as fiction, and most of the claims remain unverified. The timeline of major events, however, lines up.
US officials continue offering security assurances to Ukraine amid escalating Russian military pressure.
Biden must honestly assess if it's worth starting a war over a territory with little significance to US security.
Sascha Glaeser is a research associate at Defense Priorities.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently met with his Ukrainian counterpart Dmytro Kuleba in Washington and declared that the US commitment to Ukraine's security and territorial integrity is "ironclad."
The world is worried Putin is about to invade Ukraine. Here's why
Russian President Vladimir Putin's next move is being watched closely by experts.Tens of thousands of Russian troops have reportedly gathered at the border with Ukraine, and experts fear Russia could be about to stage a repeat of its 2014 invasion and annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, which prompted global outrage and sanctions on Moscow.
The meeting between the two officials came as Moscow stationed 90,000 troops near the Ukrainian border, leading many to fear that a large-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine could be imminent. Ukraine has been mired in a war with Russia and Russian-backed separatists in the eastern Donbas region of the country since 2014.
Blinken's comments are just the latest example of a top Biden administration official failing to accept the geopolitical reality of Ukraine.
In September, President Joe Biden met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and reiterated that "the United States remains firmly committed to Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of Russian aggression." A joint statement released after that meeting declared "the United States supports Ukraine's right to decide its own future foreign policy course free from outside interference, including with respect to Ukraine's aspirations to join NATO."
Russia is increasing combat readiness in eastern Ukraine, defense ministry warns
Both the US and Ukraine have warned that Russia could be preparing to invade Ukraine in the next few months.In a statement on Tuesday, it said that Russia "is increasing the combat readiness of the Russian occupation forces in the temporarily occupied territory in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said the same during a visit to Kyiv in October.
Is Biden really prepared to send young American men and women to fight and die over Ukraine? This kind of rhetoric from the Biden administration does not serve US interests and counterproductively increases the risk of the United States being dragged into a war with Russia.
By continuing to provide quasi-security guarantees to Ukraine, Washington is playing a dangerous game of escalation with Moscow. Russia's deployment of 90,000 troops near the Ukrainian border is likely Moscow calling Washington's bluff.
The United States has provided $2.5 billion in military aid to Ukraine since hostilities broke out. Despite this significant investment, the war has continued because the underlying geopolitical causes of the conflict have not been addressed — namely Russia's concern that Ukraine will be granted NATO membership.
Don't Give Ukraine a U.S. Security Guarantee | Opinion
If U.S. officials were being honest with themselves, they would recognize that more military assistance to the Ukrainians is unlikely to do much of anything except prompt Russia to retaliate in kind. And if the U.S. genuinely cares about Ukraine, they will look their Ukrainian colleagues in the eye and deliver them a tough message: As the weaker party in this dispute, your only viable option is to stop stalling on implementation of the Minsk II agreement and come to a diplomatic settlement. There is no sense in holding out any longer. The U.S. won't be getting into a war with a nuclear-armed Russia on Kyiv's behalf. Daniel R.
Video: Sudanese prime minister reinstated after coup as protests flare again (AFP)
Moscow fears Ukraine's accession into the alliance will result in US and NATO troops stationed directly on Russia's border. Moscow views the prevention of this outcome as a vital strategic interest and will do whatever is necessary to achieve its objective — including direct military intervention in Ukraine.
Indeed, Russian President Vladimir Putin has made it clear that NATO expansion in Ukraine would cross a "red line." Crossing that red line risks a sudden Russian attack on Ukraine which has the potential to escalate out of control.
With Russia already at war in eastern Ukraine, adding Kyiv to the alliance could result in catastrophe. NATO's collective-defense clause could require the United States and all other NATO allies to militarily defend Ukraine.
Given the risk of nuclear escalation, the Biden administration must honestly assess if it is worth starting World War III over a territory with little significance to overall US security.
Russia's buildup of troops near Ukraine sparks fears of attack: Analysis
The Russian buildup of troops near Ukraine has triggered the worst fears of a major Russian military incursion since 2014. Fears of invasion are greater now than at any time since Moscow first seized Crimea in 2014.
Russia has proven that it is willing to bear significant monetary and human costs to prevent a western-aligned Ukraine. Years of tough economic sanctions and the estimated loss of several hundred Russian soldiers has done little to change Russia's objectives in Ukraine.
Unlike Russia, the United States simply does not have a strong enough interest in Ukraine worth risking a potential nuclear war over.
Ending the conflict will require a comprehensive political settlement that takes Russia's geopolitical anxiety into account. One may not agree with Moscow's security concerns; however, it is necessary to address them in pursuit of a peaceful resolution. Such a settlement should see Ukraine's territorial sovereignty restored and position Ukraine as a neutral buffer state, neither aligned with Russia nor the West.
A neutral Ukraine would not seek membership in NATO or any Russian security institution, nor would it allow either side to station military forces on its territory. Instead, this policy would reflect Ukraine's precarious geographical reality of being a large, but relatively weak, state situated between Russia and NATO Europe.
It is natural to feel sympathy for Ukraine's unfortunate circumstances. Continued US military aid and offering Ukraine false hopes that NATO will come to its defense only prolong the conflict and increase the risk of war between the United States and Russia.
Working toward a realistic resolution in the form of a neutral and non-aligned Ukraine could provide an opportunity for the world's two largest nuclear powers to form a stable and predictable relationship. The Biden administration would be wise to reverse its current escalatory course with Russia and pursue a US-Ukraine policy that actually increases US security.
Sascha Glaeser is a research associate at Defense Priorities. He focuses on US grand strategy, international security, and transatlantic relations. He holds a master's in international public affairs and a bachelor's in international studies from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Read the original article on Business Insider
Putin warns NATO of Russia's unstoppable missiles if his 'red line' in Ukraine is crossed .
Putin warned NATO that deploying troops or advanced missiles to Ukraine would cross a "red line" for Moscow, and boasted of Russia's hypersonic missiles.Putin said that the deployment of NATO troops or advanced missile systems on Ukrainian soil that could strike Moscow within minutes would be a step too far for Russia. NATO has not taken any steps along these lines.