conflict
With Only Months Left In Term, Biden Is Starting To Run Out Of Options In Russia-Ukraine War
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2114/e211461ae7677a1f0ddc39d389e80d30a041c039" alt=""
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Jake Smith
As the clock ticks down to January — the end of President Joe Biden’s sole term — the Biden-Harris administration is trying to figure out how to aid Ukraine against Russia with limited and dwindling options.
The Russia-Ukraine war has dragged on for more than two years, and though the Biden administration has devoted over $175 billion in economic and military aid to help Ukraine, it has done little to shift the tides in Kyiv’s favor. The Biden administration, unlikely to receive any more funding for aid from Congress, is looking at alternative choices including loosening weapons restrictions and allowing Ukraine to strike further inside of Russia, The Wall Street Journal reported.
The new policy would only apply to European and other Western weapons, not U.S. systems, according to multiple reports. Secretary of State Antony Blinken hinted on Wednesday that such a move was on the table and strongly being considered.
Lifting the restrictions would represent a major shift in approach from the Biden administration, which has been wary of allowing Ukraine to use Western-provided weapons for deep strikes inside Russia up to this point.
But Ukraine is likely to want more from the Biden administration than being allowed to use European weapons for long-range strikes. Specifically, Ukraine wants to use American-made Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) to strike Russia, given the high quality and range of the system, though the administration may be more unlikely to grant that request.
Besides loosening weapons restrictions, the administration has few other options. Though Biden was able to sign off on a congressionally approved $60 billion aid package for Ukraine in April, Congress isn’t expected to grant any more funding for the war between now and January, limiting the amount of assistance the administration can provide.
The Russia-Ukraine war has largely stalled out, with neither side conceding substantial territory to the other, although Ukrainian forces have recently made a surprising incursion into southern Russia and captured hundreds of miles of territory.
“They see this as part of their strategy to defend themselves, to develop leverage,” the senior administration told the WSJ.
Behind closed doors, however, administration officials are worried that Ukraine is dedicating too many forces to the incursion and stretching thin its forces trying to hold the front line against Russia, according to the WSJ. Russian forces have also begun a counteroffensive against Ukrainians spearheading an incursion, risking further escalation in the war.
Biden’s top aides realize the odds that Ukraine can secure a military victory against Russia by January are near zero, according to the WSJ. The Biden administration is not pressuring Kyiv to negotiate a peace deal with Russia, even though some lawmakers and national security experts believe that is the only way to end the war.
Instead, the administration is choosing to let Kyiv dictate war plans and “improve Ukraine’s strategic position to the greatest extent possible between now and the end of the term,” one senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the matter, told the WSJ.
The Biden administration has been under scrutiny for its handling of the Russia-Ukraine war, with critics fearing that there is no strategy to end the war or push Ukraine toward a military victory, which itself seems unlikely. The U.S. has slowly become more involved in the war but it has done little to move the needle while Ukraine’s manpower continues to be exhausted.
The administration’s strategy “sounds an awful lot like a recipe for another endless war [because it is] unable to send enough weapons to make a decisive difference on the battlefield, and they don’t have a clear sense of what the endgame should be,” Rachel Rizzo, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, told the WSJ.
conflict
Europe’s Heads of State Have Learned Nothing from 170 years of history
By John Leake
With the exception of Viktor Orban, Europe’s so-called leaders have a learning disability of miraculous proportions.
While the Congress of Vienna (1815) seemed to inaugurate a new era of hope for peace in Europe, Europe’s leaders couldn’t resist the siren song of bloodyminded pigheadedness that drew them into the Crimean War (1853-1856) in which Britain and France thought it more sensible to side with the Ottoman Turks than with Russia over various religious and territorial disputes in the Black Sea that are now too tedious to recount.
The only redemptive feature of the Crimean War—at least on the British side—is that members of the ruling class that wanted the war were willing to serve on the front line of it. Lieutenant-General James Thomas Brudenell, 7th Earl of Cardigan, was notorious for his aristocratic haughtiness and extravagance. He also achieved legendary status for leading the Charge of the Light Brigade during the Battle of Balaclava, immortalized in Tennyson’s poem.
Watching Cardigan charge directly into a Russian battery, the French commander, Pierre Bosquet remarked: “C’est magnifique, mais ce n’est pas la guerre: c’est de la folie (“It is magnificent, but it is not war: it is madness.”).
After the British and French backed the Ottomans against the Russians in the Crimean War, they backed the Russians against the Germans, Austrians, and Ottomans during the Great War of 1914-1918. When it came to drafting the Treaty of Versailles, the Allies were more interested in ascribing blame to the Germans than in making a lasting peace. This led to World War II, when British and the French backed the Russians once again against the Germans and the Austrians—this time with the Turks joining their side.
After World War II, the Americans thought it more important to create a lasting peace than to punish Germany again, so they chose the Marshall Plan instead of the punitive Morganthau Plan.
At the war’s conclusion, erstwhile allies U.S. and Russia, became mortal enemies in a Cold War in which they threatened each other with nuclear annihilation. At the conclusion of the Cold War, Washington decided to revert to the spirit of the Treaty of Versailles to kick Russia while it was down and to maintain a state of enmity with it instead of taking pains to incorporate it into the West.
In its great sagacity, the Trump administration has recognized that there is nothing to be gained for the American people by continuing the U.S. proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. Trump and his people recognize the reality that it would be far better to have a mutually respectful and beneficial relationship with Russia than to continue threatening it and maintaining a state of enmity with it.
Trump starkly contrasts with Europe’s so-called leaders, who wish to keep the Great Game pissing contest with Russia going. Like 15-year-old female rivals on a high school cheerleading squad, they find it more important to ascribe blame in the West’s longstanding conflict with Russia than to find a peaceful solution to it. All the phony expressions of solicitude for the people of Ukraine are pure humbug. Europe’s so-called leaders are perfectly happy to continue sending young Ukrainian men to their deaths and they will work hard to undermine Trump’s efforts to end the killing.
I would wager a large sum that not a single European head of state with the exception of Viktor Orban could—without referring to an Encyclopedia—provide an account of the various disputes, touchy matters of honor, and attributions of blame that were the casus belli of the Crimean War, the Franco-Prussian War, the First World War, or the Second World War. They are ignorant, childish brats who have learned nothing from European history.
I never thought I would say that President Trump must have the patience of a saint to suffer Europe’s irritating parcel of whiny, mercenary, and malevolent wimps.
Subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
conflict
Trump meets Macron at White House, says Ukraine war ending soon
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a96c0/a96c0365c975aa34b87fec4f292fb2f813b205f3" alt=""
MxM News
Quick Hit:
President Donald Trump met with French President Emmanuel Macron at the White House on Monday to discuss Ukraine and broader economic partnerships. The meeting, which followed a virtual G7 summit, saw Trump reiterate his long-standing claim that the war “would have never started if I was President.”
Key Details:
-
Trump and Macron participated in a virtual G7 meeting earlier in the day, hosted by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, marking the third anniversary of the Russia-Ukraine war.
-
Trump emphasized a forthcoming “Critical Minerals and Rare-Earths Deal” with Ukraine, describing it as an “Economic Partnership” that would allow the U.S. to recoup the “Tens of Billions of Dollars and Military Equipment sent to Ukraine.”
-
The President also revealed he is engaged in ongoing discussions with Vladimir Putin regarding a potential resolution to the war, as well as major economic agreements between the U.S. and Russia.
Diving Deeper:
On Monday, President Donald Trump welcomed French President Emmanuel Macron to the White House for high-level discussions on Ukraine, economic development, and transatlantic relations. The meeting followed a virtual G7 summit, where world leaders marked three years since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war—a conflict Trump once again declared “would have never started if I was President.”
In a Truth Social post, Trump provided a summary of the day, revealing that the leaders reaffirmed their shared goal of ending the war while emphasizing economic cooperation between the U.S. and Ukraine. The President highlighted a forthcoming “Critical Minerals and Rare-Earths Deal” aimed at strengthening Ukraine’s economy while ensuring American taxpayers recoup some of the massive financial aid and military equipment previously sent to Kyiv.
“This deal, which is an ‘Economic Partnership,’ will ensure the American people recoup the Tens of Billions of Dollars and Military Equipment sent to Ukraine, while also helping Ukraine’s economy grow as this Brutal and Savage War comes to an end,” Trump wrote.
Beyond his discussions with Macron, Trump disclosed that he is in “serious discussions” with Russian President Vladimir Putin, stating that negotiations are underway to end the war and facilitate economic agreements between the U.S. and Russia. “Talks are proceeding very well!” he added.
Trump’s meeting with Macron comes amid heightened uncertainty surrounding Ukraine’s future leadership and the broader trajectory of Western involvement in the war. Over the weekend, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky suggested he would be willing to step down in exchange for a peace settlement or NATO membership for his country.
Meanwhile, European leaders, including UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, have stressed the importance of a united front against Russia. A Downing Street statement reaffirmed the UK’s commitment to supporting Ukraine “for as long as needed,” with Starmer and Macron set to continue discussions on the issue in Washington this week.
Trump’s direct engagement in diplomatic talks with Putin—without Kyiv’s participation—marks a sharp departure from the Biden administration’s approach. While Biden and European allies have focused on military aid and long-term deterrence, Trump has repeatedly asserted that he alone can bring an end to the war swiftly. His latest comments suggest that he is actively working to shape the future of U.S.-Russia relations, even as Ukraine’s political landscape remains in flux.
With economic concerns looming large and global security interests at stake, Trump’s approach to the Russia-Ukraine war and transatlantic partnerships will likely remain a focal point in the months ahead.
-
National2 days ago
Mark Carney’s Shocking Debate Meltdown
-
Business1 day ago
Liberal leadership debate sees candidates bash Trump, promise to fight ‘climate change’
-
Energy2 days ago
There is no better time for the Atlantic to follow the Pacific as the next stage of Canadian energy development
-
Conspiracy Facts With Jeffrey Rath2 days ago
Where’s the data on miscarriages linked to COVID Injections?
-
Business2 days ago
The NSA’s Secret Sex Chats
-
Opinion23 hours ago
Liberal leadership race guarantees Canadian voters will be guided by a clown show for a while yet
-
Business23 hours ago
COVID lockdowns in Canada cost small businesses $60 billion in first year alone
-
Bjorn Lomborg1 day ago
We need to get smart about climate