There is a debate raging in the halls of Congress, the White House and around the world…….should Ukraine been armed to meet the threats from Putin’s Russia.
The US is increasingly leaning towards the former………
Despite Vladimir Putin’s posturing for a peaceful resolution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, a senior US State Department official says Eastern Ukraine’s security position is “dire” and Russia is “failing miserably” in its peace efforts, CNN reports. The official spoke today on John Kerry’s plane as he headed to Kiev to meet with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and PM Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Speaking later on the ground, Kerry called on Russia to pull heavy weapons, equipment, and troops out of Ukraine and shut down the border in a solution to the crisis “that is staring everyone in the face.” French President Francois Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel are also set to arrive in Kiev today before heading to Russia tomorrow to meet with Putin, CNN notes.
Kerry has pledged $16.4 million in new humanitarian aid to Ukraine designed to “help alleviate the suffering of people in conflict-affected areas,” a State Department statement issued today said. Meanwhile, NATO is refining its strategy as well. Even though Ukraine isn’t a member, the organization says it “strongly supports” the beleaguered country and would continue to offer political and practical assistance, as per CNN. In discussion now are plans to set up dedicated NATO command centers in six member nations, including Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Bulgaria, and Poland. These units would help with NATO training in these countries and make it easier to quickly deploy troops. Meanwhile, the US is mulling whether to send defensive “lethal aid” such as anti-armor missiles to Ukrainian troops to help them fight pro-Russia rebels.
This is a tricky question and even trickier decision that is being made……my problem is one thing that the prez had to say about the arming debate…..
President Obama left little doubt that he intends to eventually start providing weaponry to the Ukrainian military for its civil war, saying only that he needs to be certain it is “used properly.”
Okay first of all what does the term “used properly” actually mean? It has been said that these will be defensive weapons……pause here for thought……what is the difference between a defensive weapon and an offensive one? And just who makes that decision?
This is the same type of rhetoric that we always get from the government……but the question remains….should we or should we not arm Ukraine?
Personally I say NO……it will not make the situation any less explosive. If anything will lead to an escalation by Putin. Even with a massive influx of weapons from NATO will not make Ukraine safer and if push comes to shove they will not be capable of fending off a Russian onslaught….
This tactic will not work….it will be a waste of time and the possibility of it getting worse instead of better is a real threat.
Arms are not the answer…..however diplomacy may prove a better weapon….too bad it is seldom tried before someone pulls the trigger.
The only people that will benefit from the massive weapons that could be sent to Ukraine is the ones that ALWAYS make out in these situations…..the defense contractors.
Any thoughts from my readers?