conflict
How the Biden-Harris admin pushed Russia into war with Ukraine
From LifeSiteNews
By Bob Marshall
I was … bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe.… Our differences in the Cold War were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime.
In September, Vice President Kamala Harris stated several points at the White House as to how she would handle the Ukraine-Russia war: “I will work to ensure Ukraine prevails in this war.… Putin started this war, and … Putin could set his sights on Poland, the Baltic states, and other NATO Allies.… [S]ome in my country … demand that Ukraine accept neutrality, and would require Ukraine to forego security relationships with other nations. These proposals are the same of those of Putin.”
But these are the same Biden-Harris tactics and policies that provoked war.
Harris blames Russian President Vladimir Putin for the war. But the proximate source of the Russia-Ukraine conflict goes back beyond Putin to the breakup of the Soviet Empire and even earlier.
End of the Cold War
In late October 1989, the famed Berlin Wall as a dividing line between Socialist German Democratic Republic (GDR) and West Germany, called a “wall of mistrust” by then former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, was crumbling.
Obviously, Gorbachev, with almost 400,000 troops in East Germany could have stopped the reunification. But Western officials gave Russian leaders assurances there was nothing to worry about. U.S. Secretary of State James Baker told Gorbachev that NATO expansion would proceed, “not one inch eastward.” The next day, West German chancellor Helmut Kohl assured Gorbachev, “NATO should not expand the sphere of its activity.”
The Los Angeles Times noted, “Less than a week later, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev agreed to begin reunification talks. No formal deal was struck, but from all the evidence, the quid pro quo was clear: Gorbachev acceded to Germany’s western alignment and the U.S. would limit NATO’s expansion.… NATO’S widening umbrella doesn’t justify Putin’s … incursions in Ukraine or Georgia. Still, the evidence suggests that Russia’s protests have merit and that U.S. policy has contributed to current tensions in Europe.”
Documents at George Washington University testify to agreements made between Western leaders and Russian officials at this time – that western nations would not expand NATO to the East.
Boris Yeltsin was the first president of the Russian Federation from 1991 to 1999, coming to office immediately after Premier Gorbachev’s resignation with the dissolution of the Soviet Empire. In 1995, President Yeltsin met with President Clinton in St. Catherine’s Hall at the Kremlin.
Yeltsin said to Clinton, “I want to get a clear understanding of your idea of NATO expansion, because now I see nothing but humiliation for Russia if you proceed. How do you think it looks to us if one bloc continues to exist while the Warsaw Pact has been abolished? It’s a new form of encirclement if the one surviving Cold War bloc expands right up to the borders of Russia. Many Russians have a sense of fear. What do you want to achieve with this if Russia is your partner, they ask. I ask it too. Why do you want to do this?”
When Clinton spoke to Yeltsin in 1995, there were 15 NATO member countries. When Clinton left office, there were 18.
Russia’s opposition to NATO expansion
In 2016, President Clinton’s former Defense Secretary Bill Perry said, “In the last few years, most of the blame can be pointed at the actions that Putin has taken. But in the early years … the United States deserves much of the blame.… Our first action … in a bad direction was when NATO started to expand, bringing in eastern European nations, some of them bordering Russia.”
Former CIA Director Robert Gates, who also served as Secretary of Defense for President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama, opposed the policy of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.”
In June 1997, 50 former senators, retired military officers, diplomats, and foreign policy academics wrote to President Clinton about the problems and ill consequences of NATO expansion:
[T]he current U.S. led effort to expand NATO … is a policy error of historic proportions.… NATO expansion will decrease allied security and unsettle European stability …
In Russia, NATO expansion, which continues to be opposed across the entire political spectrum, will strengthen the nondemocratic opposition … [and] bring the Russians to question the entire post-Cold War settlement.
In 1998, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman asked George Kennan, who devised the successful “containment” policy to prevent the Soviet Union from achieving its goal of world domination through open warfare, what he thought of the U.S. Senate ratifying NATO expansion even up to Russia’s border. Kennan replied:
[I]t is the beginning of a new Cold War.… There was no reason for this.… No one was threatening anybody else.… We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so.
I was … bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe.… Our differences in the Cold War were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime.
In 2007, Putin noted, “NATO has put its frontline forces on our borders … and what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact … NATO General Secretary Mr. Woerner in Brussels on May 17, 1990 … said … ‘The fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee.’ Where are these guarantees?”
Fiona Hill points to 2007 when Putin “put the world, and certainly Europe, on notice that Moscow would not accept the further expansion of NATO.… In 2008 NATO gave an open door to Georgia and Ukraine.… Four months after NATO’s Bucharest Summit, there was the [Russian] invasion of Georgia. There wasn’t an invasion of Ukraine then because the Ukrainian government pulled back from seeking NATO membership.”
William Burns, now President Biden’s Central Intelligence director and former U.S. ambassador to Russia, wrote to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in 2008:
Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players … I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.
Putin told Burns in 2008: “No Russian leader could stand idly by in the face of steps toward NATO membership for Ukraine. That would be a hostile act toward Russia. We would do all in our power to prevent it.”
In 2015, the German Der Speigel magazine interviewed Zbigniew Brzezinski, former national security advisor to President Jimmy Carter, regarding the status of Ukraine in response to the abrupt change in the presidential leadership and Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Brzezinski suggested that “Ukraine should be free to choose its political identity.… But … Russia should be assured credibly that Ukraine will not become a member of NATO.”
More recently in 2022, the Wall Street Journal reported, “Pope Francis said that the ‘barking of NATO at the door of Russia’ might have led to the invasion of Ukraine.… The pope … deplored the brutality of the war.… Pope Francis … described Russia’s attitude to Ukraine as ‘an anger that I don’t know whether it was provoked but was perhaps facilitated’ by the presence in nearby countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.… ‘In Ukraine, it was other states that created the conflict.’”
The caution of these experienced statesmen and world leaders is lost on President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.
This article is reprinted with permission from the Family Research Council, publishers of The Washington Stand at washingtonstand.com.
conflict
Trump tells World Economic Forum ‘time to end’ war in Ukraine
From LifeSiteNews
By Matt Lamb
President Donald Trump urged Vladimir Putin to make a deal and end the war in Ukraine. He also told the World Economic Forum that he will lower the price of oil, which will put pressure on Russia.
President Donald Trump urged Vladimir Putin to “make a deal” and end the war in Ukraine on Thursday. The same day, he also told the World Economic Forum (WEF) it is “time to end it.”
“I don’t know, I think he should make a deal,” President Trump told reporters on Thursday when asked if tariffs and sanctions would lead to negotiations, as reported by The Hill.
He also said Vladimir Zelenskyy is “ready to negotiate a deal.”
Speaking about China’s role, Trump said further:
It’s a very big trading partner. But, Russia supplies a lot of energy to China, and China pays them a lot of money for that, and I think they have a lot of power over Russia. So, I think Russia should want to make a deal. Maybe they want to make a deal. I think, from what I hear, Putin would like to see me meet as soon as we can. I’d meet immediately.
On Thursday morning, Trump addressed the World Economic Forum virtually and said his energy plan will put pressure on Russia by bringing down the price of oil. He also then said that China can help end the war.
He stated:
If the price came down, the Russia-Ukraine war would end immediately. Right now, the price is high enough that that war will continue. You got to bring down the oil price; you’re going to end that war. They should have done it long ago. They’re very responsible, actually, to a certain extent, for what’s taking place — millions of lives are being lost.
Trump criticized the death toll in Ukraine, calling it a “killing field,” during his WEF speech.
“Millions of soldiers are being killed,” Trump said, twice comparing it to World War II.
Saying there are “millions of Russians and millions of Ukrainians” killed, he said it is “time to end it.”
“I think you’re going to find that there were many more people killed in Ukraine and the Ukraine war than anybody has any idea,” Trump also said in a response to a question. The president pointed out that a report of a 20-story building collapsing said only two people were injured.
Trump ran on a pledge to end the war in Ukraine and to be a president of peace. He has reiterated that pledge since the election.
— Matt Lamb (@MattLamb22) January 24, 2025
“I will end the war in Ukraine. I will stop the chaos in the Middle East, and I will prevent World War III from happening,” Trump said on January 19 during a pre-inauguration victory rally at the Capital One Arena in Washington, D.C.
Russia first invaded Ukraine in Februrary 2022. As of September 2024, United States taxpayers promised $183 billion to Ukraine.
The president’s focus on peace won him the endorsement of Tulsi Gabbard, who is now his pick for director of national intelligence.
Criticizing Kamala Harris during a rally in October, Gabbard said “she has shamelessly embraced the endorsement and support of warmongers like Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney and others who care more about power and feeding the military-industrial complex than they care about you, the American people, and peace.”
conflict
Trump Fails to End Ukraine War on Day 1
It was a lofty promise and a campaign tale that no one believed could happen. Donald Trump stayed true on his promise to carry out a number of executive orders on Day 1 of his presidency, but he cannot simply sign an EO to end the war in Ukraine. Yet he did promise to stop sending blank checks to Ukraine and has appointed a special envoy who is requesting 100 days to reevaluate America’s position in the war. More importantly, Trump would like to go directly to the source and speak with Putin.
The Kremlin broadcast Putin’s weekly security council message earlier than expected to address Trump directly. “We are open to dialogue with the new US administration on the Ukrainian conflict,” Putin said. “Its goal should not be a short truce, not some kind of respite for regrouping forces and rearmament with the aim of subsequently continuing the conflict, but a long-term peace based on respect for the legitimate interests of all people, all nations that live in this region.”
Russia will never waiver on a deal that does not include prohibiting Ukraine from joining NATO. Trump seems to be aligned with him on this issue as any reasonable mind can comprehend how this would lead to an immediate escalation into World War III. Territorial concessions? Neither Russia or Ukraine is willing to surrender territory.
New US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has reaffirmed the new administration’s message that the war in Ukraine must end. America can withhold funding or direct intervention. America cannot undo the damage that has been done. There are too many hands in the money pit that is Ukraine from world governments to investment banks. Everyone is heavily invested in Ukraine and will demand repayment for untold fortunes spent on prolonging the for-profit war. Even withdrawing from NATO would not be sufficient to end the war as the alliance has been preparing for a Trump victory before campaigning efforts began.
Europe is pushing full speed ahead to fabricate World War II, with both Germany and France offering to send “peacekeepers,” a digestible new term for “trained soldiers.” Zelensky simply wants the money to continue pouring in. “Will President Trump even notice Europe?” Zelensky asked in appearance at the World Economic Forum in Davos. “Does he see NATO as necessary, and will he respect EU institutions?” Ukraine’s president is attempting to shape this as a Europe v the USA matter as if America is abandoning Europe under Trump.
-
Business2 days ago
List of items Canadians will pay 25% tariffs on includes US made orange juice, wine, beer, and clothing
-
Business1 day ago
Trudeau Promises ‘Fentanyl Czar’ and US-Canada Organized Crime Strike Force To Avert U.S. Tariffs
-
Banks1 day ago
The Great Exodus from the Net Zero Banking Alliance has arrived
-
Business1 day ago
Poilievre Says Both Sides Lose Trade Wars, Promotes Inter-Provincial Trade
-
armed forces1 day ago
Canada could cut deal with U.S.—increase defence spending, remove tariffs
-
Business2 days ago
A Lone Federal Political Voice Opposing Retaliatory Tariffs
-
Business1 day ago
Trump, Mexican president reach deal to delay tariffs
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day ago
The Limping Loonie: Are Canada’s Pro Sports Team In Trouble Again?