Decline Of Diplomacy

This post is for all those naysayers that have nothing but crap to say about diplomacy.

In the 70’s I worked for the US State Department and I left there in 1980 when I saw the writing on the wall…diplomacy meant nothing it was all about the proxy wars we could finance and eventually fight.

Since 1970 I had been an antiwar person and thought that the state department would be at the forefront of all diplomatic endeavors….boy was I wrong!

Since 1980 diplomacy has been in decline….not accurate….it has been in free fall……

It takes enormous courage to protest a war, but when is it ever relevant to do so? There is a crisis in American democracy, yet there is no appetite to protest the decline of diplomacy. Many people believe Russia can’t be reasoned with and any chance for a negotiation is only a dream. Nobody should make a deal with the devil, they say. Americans have been led to believe that the heartbreaking war in Ukraine is beyond diplomacy.

And if there is no more time for talking, where then are we headed? Perhaps our distaste for dissent will weaken America, which was founded on the strength and value of American opinions. Differences of opinion are essential for a functioning democracy, this is the backbone of the first amendment. America’s diversity depends on its multitude of voices, which have never been more important. Dialogue is the practice of democracy.

World history continuously tells the story of peace and power, as progress is gained and lost throughout time. Bertrand Russell was once asked what message he would give to future generations. He suggested the necessity of tolerance, humans must learn to live together.

Intolerance has existed not just in recent history, but as a driving force behind all wars. In the face of global insecurity, only the strengthening of democracy through reason and discussion, has the potential to prevent tyranny. For freedom and equality to exist, disparate voices must be heard. Why then has criticism of the war been so readily dismissed as anti-American?

The Decline of Diplomacy

I still believe in diplomacy but as I read blogs and comments I think I am in a minority….Americans seem hell bent on world domination and interventionism… is veiled greed on the part of corporations that actually run this country…..

Be real!

If you do not have suitcases full of cash then your voice is little more than a fart in the wind.

At what point do Americans tire of war and the infliction of pain on the world?

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

It’s About National Security

Ever since the dastardly attacks of 9/11 the warmongers have used national security to justify the pissing away of much needed funds to arm the world and in turn help foment small wars around the globe.

Ukraine is no different….there are those that claim wasted cash on Ukraine is in our national security…..

As the costs of supporting Ukraine’s war effort soar well beyond $50 billion, high-level officials are seeking to sell Americans on even more military spending, with senators, generals and the Ukrainian president himself each insisting aid to Kiev is vital to American interests, amid rampant inflation, mounting shortages and monumental public debt in the US. 

In a statement justifying a recent vote to send another $40 billion in assistance to Ukraine, Republican Senator Ted Cruz argued the move was essential not only for the security of the US, but to ward off a Chinese attack on Taiwan as well. 

“If Putin wins in Ukraine, it will confirm for Xi that he can confidently invade Taiwan,” he said, referring to the Russian and Chinese heads of state. 

“The reason we should support our Ukrainian allies is because it protects American national security, it keeps America safer, and it prevents our enemies from getting stronger, from threatening the safety and security of Americans, and from driving up the cost, the economic damage, to Americans,” Cruz added.

What total bullshit!

Do you really think either China or Russia has desires to invade and conquer the US?

This is just those in the pockets of the defense industry to keep the money flowing and the profits build-up….NOTHING more.

Does anyone with half of a functioning brain really think that Russia or China wants total war with the US?

Total war?

Total war is mainly characterized by the lack of distinction between fighting lawful combatants and civilians. The purpose is to destroy the other contender’s resources so that they are unable to continue to wage war. This might include targeting major infrastructure and blocking access to water, internet, or imports (often through blockades). Additionally, in total war, there is no limit on the type of weapons used and biological, chemical, nuclear, and other weapons of mass destruction may be unleashed.

Does anyone think that either adversaries are prepared for total war?

I do not!

Cruz and the ‘hawks’ are just ilk trying to do the bidding of those people that own them lock stock and barrel.

Feel free to jump into this debate at anytime.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Is The World United Behind Sanctions?

Good question and the best answer is….NO they are not.

Biden has tried to whip up the world’s nations into action against Russia for its part in the invasion of Ukraine…..Europe appears to be on-board….but not the rest of the world.

Americans are fervently cheering for Ukraine in a war that many believe is a decisive struggle for human freedom. The intensity of our infatuation makes it easy to assume that everyone in the world shares it. They don’t. 

The impassioned American reaction is matched only in Europe, Canada, and the handful of U.S. allies in East Asia. For many people in the rest of the world, the Russia-Ukraine conflict is just another pointless Western war in which they have no stake.

The two biggest countries in Latin America, Mexico and Brazil, have refused to impose sanctions on Russia or to curtail trade. South Africa, the economic powerhouse of the African continent, has done the same. Asia, though, is where the resistance to joining the pro-Ukraine bloc appears most deliberate and widespread. This has alarmed Washington. To fight back, the United States is cracking its whip over several Asian nations.

China and India, where more than one-third of the world’s people live, are the most potent dissenters. Both abstained from the recent United Nations vote condemning Russia, and both reject U.S.-backed sanctions. There isn’t much more we can do to punish China, but India might seem more vulnerable. Soon after the UN vote, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced that the United States had begun “monitoring some recent concerning developments in India, including a rise in human rights abuses.” Then President Biden’s chief economic advisor, Brian Deese, warned India that it would face “significant and long-term consequences” if it does not reconsider its “strategic alignment.”

Pakistan, a nuclear power with 200 million people, did more than simply abstain from the UN vote. When the United States asked Prime Minister Imran Khan to join the anti-Russia coalition, he scoffed, “Are we your slaves…that whatever you say, we will do?”  This came not long after he told the Pentagon: “Any bases, any sort of action from Pakistani territory into Afghanistan, absolutely not.”  On the day President Vladimir Putin launched the invasion of Ukraine, Khan was with him in the Kremlin.

These countries are willing to risk US ire over Russia-Ukraine

So to answer my question….NO the world is not united against Russia on the sanctions proposals.

Any thoughts?

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Then There Is The NATO Thing

First of all my thought on NATO……I think that once the USSR collapsed and the ‘republics’ started breaking away then NATO should have been abandoned….after all NATO was suppose to be a deterrent to any expansion by the USSR and once it was gone then NATO was not needed. Replace it with some sort of trade bloc.

Then under Clinton the organization started its Eastward expansion….basically at the behest of the M-IC… opinion this started what could be seen as provocation of Russia and they bit at the worm dangled in front of them. (Please notice I said ‘could be seen’…before the idiotic diatribes begin)

Ukraine is dominating the news these but let’s look back at the early days of the 21st century……

A widespread misconception of NATO’s relation to Ukraine has been sustained by silence in news sources and falsehoods by pundits. According to this myth, the NATO-Ukraine connection, prior to Russia’s current horrific invasion, was a matter of Ukraine’s asking to join and NATO’s not saying “No.” In fact, over the last fourteen years, NATO’s conduct has gone far beyond openness to eventual admission, in engagements that have included extensive and expanding joint military operations in Ukraine. This involvement, which was accompanied by US efforts to shape Ukrainian politics, does not in the least affect Putin’s moral responsibility for the carnage he is inflicting. But awareness of this history should affect vitally important assessments of the proper response.

In 2008, William Burns, then U.S. ambassador to Russia and now CIA director, cabled from Moscow, “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin) …I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.” As Burns’ cable suggests, Ukraine has distinctive geopolitical significance for Russia. It is the next-largest country in Europe, after Russia, dominates the northern border of the Black Sea, and has a 1,227-mile land border with Russia. Nonetheless, at the end of the 2008 Bucharest NATO Summit, when expansion to Russia’s borders was virtually complete, NATO, led by the US, declared agreement on its completion: “We agreed today that these two countries [Ukraine along with Georgia] will become members of NATO.” In 2011, a NATO report noted, “The Alliance assists Ukraine … in preparing defence policy reviews and other documents, in training personnel, … modernising armed forces and making them more interoperable and more capable of participating in international missions” — international cooperation that had already included a joint Black Sea naval exercise with the US.

The Backstory of NATO, Ukraine and Putin’s Fears

Now NATO wants to expand even more…this time it is Finland and Sweden.

NATO being a war-hawk institution is pushing for a quick inclusion of these states…..

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Thursday that Finland and Sweden would be embraced with open arms should they decide to join the 30-nation military organization and could become members quite quickly.

Stoltenberg’s remarks came as public support in Finland and Sweden for NATO membership mounts in response to Russia’s war in Ukraine. Media speculation in the two countries suggest the two might apply in mid-May.

“It’s their decision,” Stoltenberg said. “But if they decide to apply, Finland and Sweden will be warmly welcomed, and I expect that process to go quickly.”

I have a problem once again….this expansion will further act as a provocation and could lead to even more conflicts down the road.

There are reasons that this process should be stopped here and now…..

Almost eight decades have passed since the end of World War II and Europe remains helplessly dependent on America. Yet U.S. officials are celebrating the expected application by Finland and Sweden to join NATO.

The Washington Blob doesn’t seem likely to be satisfied until every country on earth relies on the U.S. for its defense.

The accession of these two nations — which would be rapidly granted as war rages between Ukraine and Russia — is being presented as strengthening the alliance. However, the U.S., alone or in conjunction with its 29 NATO allies, many of which appear to field militaries mostly for show, would handily defeat Moscow in any continental contest.

That was evident even before Russia’s botched invasion of Ukraine. Now, two months into a conflict that was supposed to have overrun the latter in a few days or weeks at most, no one imagines that Moscow retains more than a shadow of the Soviet Union’s conventional military capabilities.

In truth, NATO expansion has never been about American security. Rather, it was meant to expand Washington’s defense dole in the name of promoting regional stability.

So why should Americans increase their defense load now? The U.S. should stop adding new members to the transatlantic alliance and instead prepare to turn Europe’s defense over to Europe. Here are nine reasons to keep the door closed to Finland and Sweden.

Nine reasons why NATO should close the door to Sweden and Finland

Let’s be honest….since the mid-1990s NATO has NOT been about American security but rather to make the world dependent on our defense industry….American weapons are big business.

Time for this expansionist mindset to be put to bed….war is never the answer and preparation for it should be secondary.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Citizen Genet Affair

It is the weekend and as a small diversion from the horrific news of the I would like to offer up a little American since there are moves to re-write it….I think it is important to learn it all…the good, the bad and the ugly… let’s step into the ‘way back machine’ to the early days of our republic.

I once taught a class on American Foreign Policy from the beginning to recent history……some say the John Adams and his Sedition Act was our first crisis on the international stage….I disagree.

The new nation of United States of America faced its first foreign policy crisis in 1793 when the US and France were at diplomatic odds….

Edmond Charles Genêt served as French minister to the United States from 1793 to 1794. His activities in that capacity embroiled the United States and France in a diplomatic crisis, as the United States Government attempted to remain neutral in the conflict between Great Britain and Revolutionary France. The controversy was ultimately resolved by Genêt’s recall from his position. As a result of the Citizen Genêt affair, the United States established a set of procedures governing neutrality.

American foreign policy in the 1790s was dominated by the events surrounding the French Revolution. Following the overthrow of the monarchy in 1792, the revolutionary French Government clashed with the monarchies of Spain and Great Britain. French policymakers needed the United States to help defend France’s colonies in the Caribbean – either as a neutral supplier or as a military ally, and so they dispatched Edmond Charles Genêt, an experienced diplomat, as minister to the United States. The French assigned Genêt several additional duties: to obtain advance payments on debts that the U.S. owed to France, to negotiate a commercial treaty between the United States and France, and to implement portions of the 1778 Franco-American treaty which allowed attacks on British merchant shipping using ships based in American ports. Genêt’s attempt to carry out his instructions would bring him into direct conflict with the U.S. Government.

The French Revolution had already reinforced political differences within President George Washington’s Cabinet. The Democratic-Republicans, led by Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, sympathized with the French revolutionaries. The Federalists, led by Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, believed that ties with Great Britain were more important. President Washington attempted to steer a neutral course between these two opposing views. He believed that joining Great Britain or France in war could subject the comparatively weak United States to invasion by foreign armies and have disastrous economic consequences. President Washington issued a proclamation of neutrality on April 22, 1793.

Further reading on this historic issue…..

The early years of our republic are fascinating….so much back and forth…..start and stop for American foreign policy.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”


UN Security Council Veto

While the conflict rages in Ukraine….and the idiots here in the US like MTG and Trump and Gaetz mouth their lunacies there is a big story on the international stage…..the UN.

There are 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council and all it takes to kill any legislation is one member to veto the action.

How moronic is that?

First we should ask why 5 permanent members?

The permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (also known as the Permanent Five, Big Five, or P5) are the five sovereign states to whom the UN Charter of 1945 grants a permanent seat on the UN Security Council: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

According to Oppenheim’s International Law : United Nations, “Permanent membership in the Security Council was granted to five states based on their importance in the aftermath of World War II.”

It is the 21st century and those dark days of WW2 are gone….time to re-think the Security Council.

The UN is doing just that…..

The United Nations is on Tuesday set to debate a provision that would require the five permanent members of the body’s Security Council – the United States, United Kingdom, France, China and Russia – to justify invoking their veto powers.

The reform to the Security Council has been floated for years at the UN but has regained new traction following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Currently, the five permanent members can veto any resolutions put forth by the Security Council. Meanwhile, the rotating 10 other members have no such power.

The latest proposal, put forth by Liechtenstein, is co-sponsored by 50 countries including the US. No other permanent members are currently co-sponsors, although France has indicated it will support the move, according to the AFP news agency.

The text of the proposal, obtained by the AFP, calls for the 193 members of the General Assembly to gather “within 10 working days of the casting of a veto by one or more permanent members of the Security Council, to hold a debate on the situation as to which the veto was cast”.

This is a major item for accountability….but most people will ignore this simply because they hate the UN for whatever reason….but I think that hatred is misplaced and I have let my thoughts on it be known…..

Why Hate The United Nations (UN)?

After WW2 and the founding of the UN much has happened……

World War II demonstrated this ugliness in the Holocaust and in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. From Hiroshima and the Holocaust rose two mighty movements, one for peace and against the perils of further nuclear attacks, and the other for an end to the divisions of humanity and for a nonalignment from these divisions. The Stockholm Appeal of 1950, signed by 300 million people, called for an absolute ban on nuclear weapons. Five years later, 29 countries from Africa and Asia, representing 54 percent of the world’s population, gathered in Bandung, Indonesia, to sign a 10-point pledge against war and for the “promotion of mutual interests and cooperation.” The Bandung Spirit was for peace and for nonalignment, for the peoples of the world to put their efforts into building a process to eradicate history’s burdens (illiteracy, ill health, hunger) by using their social wealth. Why spend money on nuclear weapons when money should be spent on classrooms and hospitals?

Despite the major gains of many of the new nations that had emerged out of colonialism, the overwhelming force of the older colonial powers prevented the Bandung Spirit from defining human history. Instead, the civilization of war prevailed. This civilization of war is revealed in the massive waste of human wealth in the production of armed forces—sufficient to destroy hundreds of planets—and the use of these armed forces as the first instinct to settle disputes. Since the 1950s, the battlefield of these ambitions has not been in Europe or in North America, but rather it has been in Africa, Asia, and Latin America—areas of the world where old colonial sensibilities believe that human life is less important. This international division of humanity—which says that a war in Yemen is normal, whereas a war in Ukraine is horrific—defines our time. There are 40 wars taking place across the globe; there needs to be political will to fight to end each of these, not just those that are taking place within Europe. The Ukrainian flag is ubiquitous in the West; what are the colors of the Yemeni flag, of the Sahrawi flag, and of the Somali flag?

Now is the Time for Nonalignment and Peace

I believe that the world would be better off without these powers of veto in the hands of a single nation.

All nations need to be held to the same standard and the elimination of this silly veto power would be a great step forward.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

That Moldovan Thing

All the pundits are trying to zero in on just Putin’s intentions will be after the Ukraine fighting winds down…..will Vlad the Invader have his eyes on another region for his exercise in masculinity…..

I purposed that a neighbor of Ukraine could be next….the nation of Moldova…

My friend over at American Liberal Times also had his thoughts down for what is next for Putin…..

Russia’s new push in the South of Ukraine where Russia could open up a corridor to the separatist region of Moldova….

A Russian deputy military commander said Moscow could seize Ukraine’s Black Sea coast to create a corridor to a breakaway region of Moldova.

On Friday, Rustam Minnekaev, acting commander of Russia’s Central Military District, said, “control over the south of Ukraine is another way to Transnistria, where there is also evidence that the Russian-speaking population is being oppressed.” He added, “One of the tasks of the Russian army is to establish full control over the Donbas and southern Ukraine.”

Nearly 500,000 people live in Transnistria, a narrow section of Moldova that borders Ukraine. While no countries recognize its sovereignty from Moldova, it has been self-ruled since 1992. Russia has about 1,500 peacekeepers in Transnistria.

The Moldovan said the comments conflict with Russia’s stated policy. “These statements are unfounded and contradict the position of the Russian Federation supporting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova, within its internationally recognized borders,” the Moldovan foreign ministry told the Washington Post.


This thing is far from over….just by the words of Russian generals……

A Russian commander made it clear Friday that Moscow isn’t planning to stop the war in Ukraine anytime soon. State media quoted Rustam Minnekayev, acting commander of Russia’s central military district, as saying Russia plans to take full control of southern Ukraine as well as the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine, Reuters reports. Minnekayev reportedly said Russia plans to hold southern Ukraine as a land bridge between Donbas and Ukraine, and as “another way to Transdniestria, where there is also evidence that the Russian-speaking population is being oppressed.”

To protect the Russian speaking minority…..where have we heard this before in history?

Then rockets attack in the break-away region…..

Over the past few days, multiple attacks and explosions have been reported in the breakaway Transnistria region of Moldova that borders Ukraine. Transnistria has been a de facto independent state since 1992 and hosts about 1,500 Russian troops on a “peacekeeping” mission.

On Monday, several explosions that were said to be caused by rocket-propelled grenades reportedly hit Transnistria’s Ministry of State Security in the capital Tiraspol. On Tuesday, the territory’s Security Council said a “terrorist attack” hit a military unit near Tiraspol.

Vadim Krasnoselsky, the leader of Transnistria, said the attacks could be traced back to Ukraine. “The traces of these attacks lead to Ukraine,” Krasnoselsky said, according to Russia’s Tass news agency. “I assume that those who organized this attack have the purpose of dragging Transdniestria into the conflict.”

Both Russia and Moldovan President Maia Sandu expressed concern about the attacks. “This is an attempt to escalate tensions. We decisively condemn such acts,” Sandu said. She attributed the blasts to “internal differences between various groups in Transnistria that have an interest in destabilizing the situation.”


This bold statement should have the M-IC drooling allover themselves….the profit possibility is staggering.

For those interested in more information on this region and its involvement…..

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Where The Hell Is South Ossetia?

Many people are asking what next for Putin….just a few thoughts on that question…..

South Ossetia, officially part of Georgia (the country not the state), is separated from Russia’s North Ossetia region by a border running high in the Caucasus Mountains. Much of the region lies more than 1,000 metres above sea level.

A source of tension since the break-up of the Soviet Union, South Ossetia hosted a brief war between Russia and Georgia in 2008. Moscow subsequently recognized South Ossetia as an independent state, and began a process of closer ties that Georgia views as effective annexation.

Now some will be asking why is this important…..good question.
I preface the answer with something I wrote recently about another possibility for conflict in the region around Ukraine….

In the light of the Russian invasion of Ukraine other possibilities for the increase for violence in the region is emerging.

Since the region is awash with Russian influence….remember in Ukraine when the Crimea voted to join with Russia? We;ll something similar is brewing in Georgia’s South Ossetia region…..

The leader of Georgia’s breakaway republic of South Ossetia has said he’s ready to take steps to join Russia, and a referendum is expected to be held within the next few months.

South Ossetia is a de facto independent state and has been recognized by Russia and several other countries since the brief 2008 war. Russia intervened in 2008 to help South Ossetia fight off the forces of then-Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, but most countries still recognize South Ossetia as part of Georgia.

“I believe that unification with Russia is our strategic goal, our path, the aspiration of the people,” said South Ossetian President Anatoly Bibilov, according to Al Jazeera. “We will take the relevant legislative steps shortly. The republic of South Ossetia will be part of its historical homeland – Russia.”

A spokeswoman for Bibilov said the region was planning to hold a referendum on the matter in light of the “window of opportunity that opened in the current situation,” referring to Russia’s attack on Ukraine.

 Viktor Vodolatsk, a member of Russia’s State Duma, said a referendum will likely be held in May or June. Russia’s Tass news agency reported that South Ossetia is holding consultations with Moscow on the referendum.

Georgian Foreign Minister David Zalkaliani reacted to the news on Thursday and said that “it is unacceptable to speak of any referendums while the territory is occupied by Russia.” Zalkaliani said the referendum “will have no legal force.”

The US also made it clear that it wouldn’t recognize the referendum. State Department spokesman Ned Price said that the US “will not recognize the results of any effort by Russia or its proxies to divide sovereign Georgian territory.”


If this is successful it will give Russia yet another jumping off point for further excursions into Georgia (the country not the state)…..something that happened in the early 2000s.

Are we looking at more flexing of muscle by Russia?

I keep going back to my previous post….About 9 years ago I wrote that this region needs to be watched….few did….and now we have the real live mash-up in this region….

Looking For The Linchpin


Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

The Cold War

With the invasion of Ukraine by Russia the term ‘Cold War’ has returned to be part of the reporting and conversation.

But how many these days remember the so-called Cold War, with the exception of us old farts?

Well since it is history the Old Professor is here to help…..after 30 years there needs to be a refresher……

The Cold War (1947–91) was known as such because the presence of nuclear weapons made a traditional war between the rival parties (in this case the United States and the Soviet Union) unlikely as they each had the power to destroy each other and in doing so jeopardise human civilisation as a whole. This was known as ‘Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)’. For that reason, smaller-scale conflict and competition existed but a major ‘hot’ war, such as those in prior decades, was avoided. This period also underlined the importance of ideology in shaping global conflict, principally between capitalism and communism, which produced two incompatible international systems.

The Cold War was responsible for the historical image of a world divided into three zones. The ‘First World’ was the ‘Western’ nations (this is where the term ‘the West’ comes from). These states were allied with the United States, broadly followed an economic system of capitalism, and (at least aspirationally) a political system of liberal democracy. The ‘Second World’ was the Soviet Union and a range of ‘Eastern’ states that were governed predominantly by communist (or socialist) parties who rejected capitalism as an economic model. This conflict between the first and second world went beyond economics and created two irreconcilable international systems – leaving other states a stark choice to operate within one system or the other. That led to some states opting out and declaring themselves ‘non-aligned’ – creating a ‘Third World’. As most of those states were newly formed and/or developing it became a term often used to describe economically poorer states and is still sometimes used as such.

Despite the added ideological element of communism versus capitalism, the Cold War resembled other wars before it in that it became a battle for control over territory. Instead of meeting directly on the battlefield, both sides took part in ‘proxy wars’ as they fought to either support or oppose elements within states who sought to (or appeared to) move between the First and Second Worlds. The most well-known instances of this occurred in Asia, in Korea (1950–3) and Vietnam (1955–75), each of which resulted in several million deaths. As this took place in a time of decolonisation, the goal in this period was not to be seen to directly conquer other states, but to influence their political and economic development and in doing so increase the power of one ‘World’ and diminish the other.

The Cold War

What was old is now new again.

Be Smart….Learn Stuff….

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Our Man Zelensky

This post will probably get me on so many sh*t lists…..for I am not writing a glowing post on the darling of the American airways or the Congress….. As a trained analyst I was taught to leave emotions at the curb…..look beyond the emotional news of the day and try to get to the real reason for the situation that I am analyzing.

There is more to Zelensky than the orchestrated persona that the PR firms give the adoring public….and why has no outlet tried to explain the man and his policies?

What made me think about writing this post was when I saw conflict footage presented by the Azov Battalion on CNN…..

The Azov Battalion is a far Right (neo-nazi) militia unit in Ukraine…..

For me it is troubling some of the rhetoric that is being used and allowed on the evening news…..Many use xenophobic and racist language, and some are explicit in their praise of prominent Ukrainian Neo-Nazis, including C14 leader Yevhen Karas, the Right Sector fascist paramilitary, and the Neo-Nazi Azov Battalion. Multiple images call for “Banderite smoothies” – a reference to Molotov cocktails named for the late OUN-B commander Stephan Bandera, who collaborated with Nazi Germany in the mass murder of Jews and ethnic Poles during World War II.

Today Americans are in love with the president of Ukraine, Zelensky…..I will admit he is a good showman…..his speeches are meant to shame the West….his interviews are meant to shame the West…..everything he did was try to shame everyone he addresses…..this is PR, some say propaganda,  at its best.

But with all this bubbling admiration from the American people what do we really know about the man other than he is a TV comedian and president of a beleaguered nation?

In 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky, a novice politician and former television comedian, rose to the Ukrainian presidency on the strength of a peace platform. But once in power, the peace candidate turned into a hardline president, refusing to implement the Minsk peace deal; refusing to rethink the wisdom of joining NATO; refusing to question the wisdom of hosting a US military base in Yaroviv or of sending Ukrainian paramilitaries to the US for training.

What explains the change? Informed speculation suggests Zelensky was captured by the ultras of the Ukrainian far right: No peace could be made with the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk if the maximalists fighting in the east of the country refused to stand down and negotiate, as required by the Minsk Protocols that were agreed to by Ukraine, Russia, France and Germany in 2015. 

Zelensky’s behavior these past months would seem to confirm that his room to maneuver at home was severely circumscribed by the Ukrainian far right. Worse, he seemed to take Western promises of financial and military support, such those enshrined in the November 2021 US-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership, at face value.

That was his first mistake.

The tragedy of Zelensky 

I mentioned the Minsk Peace Deal…but what is that?

Minsk II, signed on 12 February 2015, required the participants to adhere to the following 13 points:

  1. An immediate and comprehensive ceasefire.
  2. Withdrawal of all heavy weapons by both sides.
  3. Monitoring and verification by the OSCE.
  4. To start a dialogue on interim self-government for the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, in accordance with Ukrainian law, and acknowledge their special status by a resolution of parliament.
  5. A pardon and amnesty for people involved in the fighting.
  6. An exchange of hostages and prisoners.
  7. Provision of humanitarian assistance.
  8. Resumption of socio-economic ties, including pensions.
  9. Restore full control of the state border by the government of Ukraine.
  10. Withdrawal of all foreign armed formations, military equipment and mercenaries.
  11. Constitutional reform in Ukraine including decentralisation, with specific mention of Donetsk and Luhansk.
  12. Elections in Donetsk and Luhansk on terms to be agreed with their representatives.
  13. Intensify the work of a Trilateral Contact Group including representatives of Russia, Ukraine and the OSCE.

This will help people understand the man and the conflict….after listening to all the pundits pump crap into the airways.

Sorry to pee on everyone’s parade…there is more to Zelensky than the optics and theater he presents to the adoring public.

Is Zelensky the new Churchill?

Nope!  Not i n my book….Only because he has bought (with who’s cash) an outstanding PR team.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”