fbpx
Politics Foreign Affairs Culture We're Hiring

The New Crimean War?

Washington war machine gearing up to manufacture consent to dangerously expand US involvement in Russia-Ukraine conflict
Screen Shot 2023-01-20 at 1.42.38 PM

The map above highlights one of the strategic reasons that Russia must hold Crimea. The War Machine is now attempting to manufacture consent for expanded involvement of the United States in the Russia-Ukraine war. Here is Time magazine with an essay by a leading Ukrainian politician, declaring that, in the words of its headline, "The Liberation Of Crimea Is A Must". She concludes her case like this: "We will have to rebuild and make Crimea welcoming, diverse, and free land again." What, not an equitable and inclusive land too? You're slipping, madam.

Washington is reportedly more open to the idea of opening a Crimean front. From the NYT:

Advertisement

After months of discussions with Ukrainian officials, the Biden administration is finally starting to concede that Kyiv may need the power to strike the Russian sanctuary, even if such a move increases the risk of escalation, according to several U.S. officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive debate. Crimea, between the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, is home to tens of thousands of dug-in Russian troops and numerous Russian military bases.

White House officials insist there is no change in position. Crimea, they say, belongs to Ukraine.

“We have said throughout the war that Crimea is Ukraine, and Ukraine has the right to defend themselves and their sovereign territory in their internationally recognized borders,” said Adrienne Watson, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council.

Privately, military and administration officials had questioned the utility of Ukraine focusing attacks on Crimea, arguing Kyiv’s military had better targets elsewhere on the battlefield.

But the Biden administration has come to believe that if the Ukrainian military can show Russia that its control of Crimea can be threatened, that would strengthen Kyiv’s position in any future negotiations. In addition, fears that the Kremlin would retaliate using a tactical nuclear weapon have dimmed, U.S. officials and experts said — though they cautioned that the risk remained.

Good lord, these fools. The Russian Black Sea fleet is stationed in Sevastopol. Does Washington really believe that it's a good idea to expand the war to a heavily garrisoned territory that is absolutely vital to Russian national security? What insanity! So what if Washington and Kyiv both believe that Crimea really belongs to Ukraine. For Washington to give Ukraine the resources it needs to launch an assault on Crimea would be an extraordinary escalation of the war. Who can predict the outcome of this?

Is this true, what this Congressman says? Maybe.

If Washington makes it feasible for Ukraine to launch an assault on Crimea, and the Sevastopol base, we would be poking the bear. Are we thinking about the consequences? Why, exactly, is it in America's vital national security interests to risk war with nuclear-armed Russia so that Ukraine can reclaim Crimea?

Is anybody in Washington thinking about this? Or is it all "Putin is bad, therefore whatever we do to fight him is justified"? Yeah, I agree, Putin is bad, and the Russians ought to get out of Ukraine. But the US escalating the war by having its Ukrainian proxies attack Crimea is lunacy.

What does Europe gain from this? I was traveling last week out of Hungary, and heard some angry grumbling from Europeans about how they are sacrificing their own economies for the sake of Washington's war aims. This thing could feasibly break NATO. Many, maybe even most, of us Westerners sympathize with Kyiv overall, but one expects American leaders in Washington to put America's national interests first, not Ukraine's.

The Russian leadership is now signaling that if it should lose the Ukraine war, the world could be looking at nuclear war. Who wants to call their bluff? Late last year, John Mearsheimer said that "we're screwed," because at this point, neither Washington nor Moscow can afford to lose in Ukraine. To extend the war to Crimea, which is only possible with American help, would be a jaw-dropping provocation to Russia, which it could not stand for. Washington is playing with fire.

Comments

Want to join the conversation?

Subscribe for as little as $5/mo to start commenting on Rod’s blog.

Join Now
Fran Macadam
Fran Macadam
It takes some chutzpah to CIA coup a peaceful country, cause a civil war between its east and west and then use that as an excuse to enter in on the western side claiming to be fixing it. If only the public could see the underlying reality. What has been sought by neocons after the uncompleted to them Cold War is the unconditional surrender of what they regard as the defeated enemy. They really believe Russia as the loser needs to be broken up into "decolonized" satrapies under western installed puppet leaders. This to them requires regime change. The United States posture as recently as November has been revised to make clear nuclear weapons can be a first strike option where defeat of allies is imminent. The original 2014 coup was intended to deliver Crimea to the United States and that failed, but the strategic objective has never been abandoned. As for the areas in the east that did not recognize the US installed coup government, it was intended to displace the population there that is Russian culturally, linguistically and ethnically, in order to place American nuclear missiles on the border minutes from destroying Moscow. That cleansing operation was to be by proxy so that the United States cannot be accused of ethnic cleansing to achieve that strategic aim.
I'd like to note that to accomplish the hubristic aim of what neither Napoleon or Hitler could accomplish, there is notably no invocation of Just War Theory to justify the ultimate US aim of Russian unconditional surrender. That omission reflects two things: the cultural changes in America of declining belief in Christian morality and ethics, and the fact that the war aims do not actually satisfy either just cause or just waging criteria. Please analyze Just War requirements and see whether they are satisfied. They are not.
I am no blind pacifist. Scripture tells us that Jesus tells us there will be wars until the end of history. War is always how the unregenerate at some juncture settle their differences. As a Christian, however, I believe our duty is to counsel against it. Personally, I believe Just War to be a theory that has failed time after time to prevent unjustified war. However, now that it is being willfully transgressed by a formerly Christian influenced west without any examination of motives, objectives or the manner of waging, that needs to be pointed out. Along with all the concurrent moral and ethical failures, judgement of leadership is severely impaired now in the matters of war. This too has a demonic aspect. Things are in the saddle, and they ride mankind. Russia is not Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, Vladimir Putin is not Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin. A large part of what is occurring is false accusation, in fact accusing others of one's own behavior.
schedule 2 weeks ago
    JON FRAZIER
    JON FRAZIER
    Putin is the one who decided on this war. If anyone is being influenced by demons it's him.
    schedule 2 weeks ago
      MCiletti
      MCiletti
      That demon was ready to come to the negotiating table for a relatively small cost back at the beginning of the invasion. Recognition of the reality of who will own Crimea, protections for the populations of the LPR and DPR from the viscous depredations they have suffered but letting them stay a part of the Ukrainian state, and most importantly stopping this insane spread of NATO. Well, we (the west) did not want that. So now we have to face the reality that the Donbas will be part of the Russian Federation, along with a "land bridge" connecting Crimea to the rest of Russia, and perhaps even as far as Odessa being back under Russian ownership. The only thing that will stop that is direct intervention by NATO troops. (i.e. WW3) Do you think the American people would want to risk nuclear war over these places?
      schedule 2 weeks ago
        JON FRAZIER
        JON FRAZIER
        I did not say Putin was a demon. But there is no moral system in which invading your neighbor and seizing territory from him (even if you think you have a just right to that territory) is not an evil act.
        schedule 2 weeks ago
      Fran Macadam
      Fran Macadam
      But you don't believe in them...
      schedule 2 weeks ago
        JON FRAZIER
        JON FRAZIER
        Better reading comprehension. I have never said I don't believe. Hell is the soft little voice we hear that misleads and deceives us. It says "You shall be as God" when urging us to do our own will no matter what.
        What I don't believe in is the cartoon, grade B horror movie version of demons. But the darkness is very real.
        schedule 2 weeks ago
          Fran Macadam
          Fran Macadam
          Since Biden repeated he had no soul, he couldn't have had this demon possessed. I wonder if the non-Decider means he's not even human, since all humans have souls. Having met a few personally, I believe in demons. Not a fun group, except initially. Glad I never met Uncle Ponto.
          schedule 2 weeks ago
JON FRAZIER
JON FRAZIER
I can see a valid reason for Russia to claim Crimea (though one could also make the claim that it ought be an independent nation in it own right as it was before Catherine the Great conquered it, and from antiquity on it was culturally distinct from the adjacent lands). However seizing territory by unilateral force is not something that can be tolerated in the 21st century.
Meanwhile the Crimean War analogy suggests that Russia will get its butt handed to it in the fracas, which is what happened in the original Crimean War, even if it was not a picnic for Britain and France.
schedule 2 weeks ago
    Theodore Iacobuzio
    Theodore Iacobuzio
    "However seizing territory by unilateral force is not something that can be tolerated in the 21st century."

    Yes. Good thing 1967 was in the last one.
    schedule 2 weeks ago
      JON FRAZIER
      JON FRAZIER
      I seem to recall Israel was attacked by its neighbors in 1967. Was it otherwise in your universe?
      schedule 2 weeks ago
    Giuseppe Scalas
    Giuseppe Scalas
    No nukes then
    schedule 2 weeks ago
Theodore Iacobuzio
Theodore Iacobuzio
"We will have to rebuild and make Crimea welcoming, diverse, and free land again."

Do not, repeat, do not underestimate the role of Big Buggery in banging the drums for the destruction of Russia. Is it the only cause? No, of course not. But it is certainly one.

This is where Kevin McCarthy has to get up on his hind legs and demand a declaration of war. I mean it. Biden will cave. They'll all have to. And then you wake up.
schedule 2 weeks ago
    MCiletti
    MCiletti
    Good post. It is amazing the power of what you call "big buggery" has on the left these days. Turning the exact same people who cheered on the Soviets for decades into allies with the war party. Why? Because mean old Vlad cancelled the pride parades! You can't find a non-interventionist lefty anymore. The technocratic elites have found the issue that cements Millenials and Zoomers into their coalition.
    schedule 2 weeks ago
      JON FRAZIER
      JON FRAZIER
      The Ukrainian War has nothing whatsoever to do with our domestic policy snits. At least try to keep a nodding acquaintance with reality, folks.
      schedule 2 weeks ago
        Theodore Iacobuzio
        Theodore Iacobuzio
        First wake up. Then read Dreher's new post.
        schedule 2 weeks ago
          JON FRAZIER
          JON FRAZIER
          More hand waving and navel gazing trying to cover up Russia's unjust war.
          schedule 2 weeks ago
        Fran Macadam
        Fran Macadam
        Flyin' those rainbow flags at all embassies worldwide and earmarking billions for spreading the LBGTQ agenda in every country. Notice how the left has no antiwar movement anymore, now they control the levers of war.
        schedule 2 weeks ago
          JON FRAZIER
          JON FRAZIER
          See: non sequitur.
          schedule 2 weeks ago
Giuseppe Scalas
Giuseppe Scalas
I think that an Ukrainian attempt to seize Crimea would elicit a nuclear response from Moscow.
schedule 2 weeks ago
    Fran Macadam
    Fran Macadam
    If Crimea is seized through U.S. intervention you can bet it won't stop there. "Real men go to Moscow." As in Afghanistan, the "Greatest Empire the World Has Ever Known" will succeed where all the others failed in taking Moscow. That could be done if the U.S. were the sole possessor of nuclear weapons and used them against an entity without them. But even then, the atmospheric ruin through radiation would poison everyone. However there is no way to defeat Russia that will not escalate to a nuclear exchange. The MAD system has been designed to automatically escalate nuclear war until all the weapons have been exchanged and all civilians outside the hardened control centers for the elites liquidated.
    schedule 2 weeks ago