What strategy experts say
It goes without saying that I have been concerned about the Russia-Ukraine war and its development since it broke out last February. The war has had serious global ramifications: a tug of war erupted between the world’s super powers, each struggling to exert dominion over the world politically, economically and militarily. Balances of global energy and trade were severely disrupted, sending inflation rates and prices in an upward spiral that appears beyond control. Not to mention the restructuring of global currency orders. All this predicts—even ensures—the restructuring of the global order established in the wake of WWII according to the 1944 Bretton Woods Agreement and the global currency order which replaced it in 1973.
As I keenly followed the development of the Russia Ukraine war, I took care to convey to my readers different viewpoints on the matter. The idea was to offer a balanced perspective of the war, especially given that the media torrent coming from the West exclusively outlined the official US address and the almost identical one adopted by its EU allies, while effectively excluding any other viewpoint. In this context I remind my readers of what I wrote last March under the title “The Russia Ukraine war: What Americans say”, and again in June under “The Russian Ukrainian crisis: What Kissinger says”.
Today I introduce opinions I recently came by, expressed by two American political and strategic experts. These opinions carry important implications as to where this war stands today, also on the political, military and historic burdens that have fallen on those who initiated the war in the first place. In an earlier editorial, I referred to a statement by Henry Kissinger, America’s old fox and shrewd diplomat, which he made last May before the World Economic Forum in Davos. Following an expert, thorough analysis of the situation, Mr Kissinger strongly advised that all parties involved should sit at a negotiation table and reach an agreement to end the crisis within two months—of that date—before the situation creates upheavals and tensions difficult to overcome. The two months are nearly over, amid American European intransigence adamant in pursuing the gruesome war until the last Ukrainian soldier. Today, Let us see what the strategists and experts have to say.
In a lecture at the Schiller International Institute, an American strategic expert said: “Ukraine has lost the war. Of course the war is not over, but it is lost. Let me show you why. This has become an artillery duel, Russia fires 50,000 shells a day, 10 times more than Ukraine. The Washington Post says that Ukraine is almost completely out of ammunition, and there are no replacements for its Soviet ordnance. On June 10th, the Post reported that Ukraine is suffering 1000 casualties a day, including 200 killed. The rate of casualties has doubled in just three weeks. With a much smaller population, Ukraine is losing 6000 soldiers killed every month. This is a casualty rate 12 times higher than we suffered in Vietnam. Ukrainians have fought with courage, but no nation can sustain such casualty rates for long. Ukraine is finished.”
John Mearsheimer, Political Science Professor at the University of Chicago said: “The conflict in Ukraine is a colossal disaster which will lead people all around the world to search for its causes. Those who believe in facts and logic will quickly discover that the United States and its allies are mainly responsible for this train wreck. The April 2008 decision to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, was destined to lead to conflict with Russia. The Bush administration was the principle architect of that fateful choice. But the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations have doubled down on that policy at every turn, and American allies have dutifully followed. Even though Russia’s leaders have made it perfectly clear that bringing Ukraine into NATO would be crossing the brightest of red lines, the United States simply refused to accommodate Russia’s deepest security concerns and instead moved relentlessly to make Ukraine a Western bulwark on Russia’s border. The tragic truth is that if the West had not pursued NATO expansion into Ukraine, it is unlikely there would be a war in Ukraine today, and Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. In essence, Washington played the central role in leading Ukraine down the path to destruction. History will judge the United States and its allies with abundant harshness for its remarkably foolish policy on Ukraine.”
I will carry on with my close follow up of reliable opinions on the Russia Ukraine war, in order to remain adequately informed and updated on the situation and what our world is about face.