Featured Image
Secretary of State Antony Blinken with Ukraine Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba at NATO Headquarters in Brussels, Belgium.Forbes / YouTube

Tell Congress to stop the Biden administration from funding wars in Ukraine and Israel

(LifeSiteNews) — With broad agreement forming that Ukraine cannot win the war against Russia, the question has been, ‘what comes next?’

Today, at a meeting at NATO headquarters in Brussels, we appear to have been given an answer. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken declared: “Ukraine will become a member of NATO.” 

Standing alongside Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba, Blinken went on to explain that the forthcoming NATO Summit in Washington, D.C. will have Ukrainian’s accession to NATO as its focus.   

“Our purpose of the summit is to help build a bridge to that membership and to create a clear pathway for Ukraine moving forward,” he continued. “We will see, I think, at the summit very strong support for Ukraine going forward and its relationship with NATO.” 

The response on social media has been outrage – at a move seen as brinkmanship towards an all-out war with Russia. Stepping back from this obvious threat – presented by Russia’s steadfast opposition to Ukrainian NATO membership, a different picture emerges. It is an image of a bridge to nowhere. 

One foreign policy specialist, credited with advising the Trump camp on NATO and U.S. grand strategy, thinks this announcement by Blinken is simply a well rehearsed performance.  

Researcher Dr. Sumantra Maitra, whose work on a “Dormant NATO” caused a media storm last November, replied to the news saying, “I don’t know why they keep doing this. It’s just hymn chanting at this point.”

Maitra’s comment recalls the fact that Blinken has been saying this for over two years. His assurance that the upcoming NATO summit will “build a bridge” to Ukraine’s membership is also nothing new. What has changed, of course, is what “Ukraine” means now.   

Blinken has held the door open for Ukraine to join NATO since at least January 2022, refusing Russia’s demand to give an assurance that Ukraine would not join the U.S.-led alliance. In February 2022, the Biden administration refused to drop its “long standing” commitment to Ukraine’s NATO membership.   

This commitment dates from 2008, when then-President George W. Bush, together with NATO leaders, made the Bucharest Summit Declaration. It said, “NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO.  We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO.” 

Sixteen years later, and Ukraine is still waiting. By comparison, Sweden’s accession took two years. 

Dmitry Kuleba, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, was understandably keen to see some action on this teenage dream. Speaking of the “bridge to NATO” he said, “I understand the decision has been taken today to task the military – military part of the Alliance with designing what that step could be.” 

Is Kuleba convinced this is going to happen? He urges a swift decision – of which he seems unconvinced. 

“And we will be looking forward to the outcome, but, of course, we believe that Ukraine deserves to be a member of NATO and that this should happen sooner – rather sooner – sooner rather than later.”  

Neither men appear to be convincing themselves, never mind one another. 

On the recklessness of the remarks today, Maitra was sobering, telling LifeSiteNews, “I think it’s moronic to dangle the carrot in front of Ukraine especially when we didn’t have them join after Bucharest and we will not in future.” 

He thinks the speech is fodder for the U.S. media, callously offering false hope.

“It’s for domestic consumption and it’s cruel to Ukraine and Georgia,” he said, adding that it could even hasten the demise of these states, dismissing the idea that NATO will ride to the rescue.  

“[It]may lead to their extinction as a state. There won’t be a NATO cavalry over the hills,” Maitra said. 

What would be best, he argues, is a realistic negotiated settlement on the status of these nations.  

“The best we can do is seek a compromise making Ukraine and Georgia neutral buffers similar to Austria during the Cold War,” Maitra recommended. 

Faced with the timescale of a process without a product, Ukraine’s future membership is shaded by two more significant questions. 

How long will NATO persist in its current form, and what kind of “Ukraine” will be left to join it? 

Answering these questions throws a little more light on Blinken and Kuleba’s performance today. 

Time running out?  

Desperate measures are seen in desperate times. The war is lost, and with it the grand strategy of regime change in Russia. Its vast mineral wealth and banking system will remain outside U.S. control as a result. What is more, its armed forces have magnified considerably as a direct result of the war.   

Meanwhile, the German economy is in ruins. This former economic powerhouse of the European Union has seen its pipelines blown up and its industry wound down, with energy costs rising alongside government borrowing.  

What has been staked in the proxy war against Russia is the entire liberal order. The panic is visible on Blinken’s face, as he knows that the ship is going down. It will take every political career staked on success against Russia with it.  

Blinken himself referred to this today, “It’s not only in Ukraine’s interest; it’s profoundly in our own.” 

Whose interest might that be? When Blinken says “our” he is using the preferred pronoun of liberal state power – which does not mean “you.” He means that the ownership of power by this faction of national suicide and international genocide is under threat.  

Speaking of his commitment to ensure more funding for Ukraine, Blinken went on, “The aggression being committed by Russia is not only an aggression against Ukraine and its people, it’s an aggression against the very principles that lie at the heart of the international system.” 

In reality, both the U.S. and the European political management are facing a rising tide of populism, which is simply a reaction to the insanity and corruption of their liberal ideology. This is the “international system” which Blinken says is at risk. The performance is not convincing anyone.  

As Vivek Ramaswamy asked yesterday, what would the next $100 billion achieve that the last $100 has not?  

Time is running out for the “rules based order,” whose business of sanctions and borderless war has so bitterly changed regimes at home that western populations no longer recognize their homelands. 

U.S. drawdown from NATO

The United States looks very likely to elect Donald Trump in November. Biden has lost the Black Caucus which secured him his nomination, with the youth vote abandoning him for the same reason: his continued supply of weapons to continue Israel’s genocide. 

Trump is committed to a U.S. drawdown from NATO, leaving an impoverished Europe to meet its own security needs. These needs are much more urgent with the current ideological leadership, who will have to go before a lifeline deal to restart Russian energy supplies.

In his policy brief on NATO from February 2023, Maitra repeated the definition of threat as “will plus capability.” It is known from the recent leaks by French intelligence that capability on the ground is absent from NATO in Europe. Is there the will for full-scale war? In the absence of the industrial base, again – probably not. 

The show must go on?

What this means is that the show is not yet over, although the curtain is coming down fast. Russia will not return the parts of Ukraine it currently occupies. It is expected to take the rest of the coast, and perhaps all of Eastern Ukraine to the Dnieper river.   

This would include most of the productive farmland and almost all of the heavy industry in Ukraine. What looks likely to remain is a landlocked rump state with no potential to support itself indefinitely. Is this the kind of failed state that NATO wants to absorb? 

Remember that these people lose everything when the loss of the Ukraine becomes impossible to deny. Blinken’s old routine today is a means of animating the corpse of Project Russia, whose collapse is the greatest strategic failure in Blinken’s lifetime. Faced with total defeat, he is refusing to accept reality, talking up partnership with a nation vanishing from the map, with an alliance whose major player is about to abandon the game. 

The situation is simple. It is either us who will have to go – or them. Is Blinken really about to start World War Three to save his career? No. Look again at his face. I do not think he believes what he is saying anymore, and neither does Kuleba. 

Outside a decision to start a nuclear war, the talking up of threats is the only capability left in the U.S. leadership. This is how they hope to keep control. 

Tell Congress to stop the Biden administration from funding wars in Ukraine and Israel