America Must Assert its Leadership in the World

President Joe Biden has a formidable task. In the span of a week, America’s commander in chief must demonstrate to European allies and global enemies that the USA not only is a team player but more importantly he is the team captain with a clear vision of the goal, that he is the leader of the free world – as the job description states.

The President’s itinerary has defined the demands. At the G7 meeting he must lead in developing a workable solution for the free world in a post-pandemic world. There are economic, commercial, political and health considerations to take into account equitably for all.

At the NATO session, the United States must show its commitment to the concept of collective security developed in 1949. Since then the alliance has served as a barricade against Moscow’s expansionism, which wasn’t a fairy tale then nor is it now. But its purpose isn’t merely to designate the line in the sand but also to assure countries, such as Ukraine and Georgia, that they will be protected from continued Russian aggression and threats. Kyiv and Tbilisi must be allowed immediate accession to the alliance without the meaningless Membership Action Plan, which only satisfies Moscow’s demands and not the needs of the remaining captive nations of Russian subjugation.

NATO, the United States and the free world must cease formulating their policies from Russia’s vantage point, whose interests and mission are diametrically opposed to the bloc.

If NATO is to be relevant and succeed in the future it must do what it did at its outset – stand up to Russia and protect the endangered countries. The United States must insist on it and exhibit its commitment to the mission and goal – and budget.

As for President Biden’s meeting with the Russian leader, it’s dangerous and not needed. Moscow is not America’s adversary – it’s the enemy. Meetings, summits, negotiations and diplomatic pleasantries are not necessary. Russia has not done anything – ever – to endear itself to the United States. Truthfully, it has always sought to undermine, subvert and destroy America. Without a clear agenda and objective – such as stop destabilizing the United States and evacuate Russian troops from Ukraine including Crimea – commiserating in Geneva in the Spring with a dictator is a waste of time and effort.

Kurt Volker, President Obama’s point man on Ukraine, observed recently that the face-to-face encounter is riskier for Biden than it is for Putin. Volker continued, saying that “any outcome that seems reassuring and benign on the surface actually works in Putin’s favor.” If the two leaders smile, shake hands and say good bye without an understanding of severe sanctions and consequences for Moscow’s continued aggression against Ukraine and subversion of the United States, Volker said, that would “send a signal globally that the authoritarians can get away with aggressive acts at home and abroad.” Russia and others would then be given a carte blanche to do whatever they wish.

Putin must see Biden “is negotiating from a position of strength,” Volker opined.

If not, then Putin and Moscow – as well as North Korea and Islamic terrorists – will continue to ride roughshod over the world. Not a good lasting impression for the world about President Biden.

Рональд Рейген – Останній антикомуніст

Сьогодні день відходу у Вічність Президента Рональда Рейгена. У його пам’ять, дозвольте мені запросити Вас прочитати мою статтю про останнього дійсного антикомуністичного американського президента Республіканської Партії Рональда Рейгена, який віддійшов у вічність у 2004 р. Ця стаття появилася в тому році у діяспорній газеті «Національній Трибуні».

5-го червня 2004 р., на 93-му році життя після десятилітньої хвороби, відійшов у вічність останній правдивий, щирий антикомуніст. Покійний Рональд Рейген, 40-ий Президент Сполучених Штатів Америки, який ніколи не пережив на власному досвіді лихоліття комуністичного тоталітаризму, цілим серцем і цілою душею вірив, що не було і не може бути нічого гіршого в історії людства, ніж комунізм і все, що він спотворив, а саме - Комуністична партія, Союз Радянських Соціалістичних Республік (читай - московська імперія) – та всі його провідники, прихильники та вислужники.

Це переконання, яке мало свою міцну підставу в його родинному, морально-релігійному вихованні, перепліталося з його цілим життєвим шляхом. Проте, здобувши посаду Президента США, Рональд Рейген точно зрозумів, що він може видвигати свою антикомуністичну політику кожного дня, добре знаючи, що аудиторія, ні прихильна, ні ворожа, не зможе вирвати від нього його визвольну платформу.

Будучи завжди людиною лагідного та жартівливого настрою, Рональд Рейген часто пояснював своїм політичним співпрацівникам, прихильникам та друзям, що не існує легкої відповіді на будь-яке запитання, є лише проста відповідь, яку необхідно знайти для успішнього вирішення будь-якого питання. Ось приклад. Члени його президентської адміністрації та політичні дорадники знали про його ненависть до комунізму і до всього, що зв”язане з ним. Вони навіть підтримували його в цьому. Але вони намагалися йому пояснити, що його Адміністрація потребує суттєву стратегію, за допомогою якої він зможе здобути прихильників і здійснити свій намір знищити комунізм.

Не схвильовано, а точніше - в притаманному йому лагідному способі, Рональд Рейген заспокоював своїх друзів, запевняючи їх, що в нього є стратегія, і вона проста: „Ми виграємо, вони програють, і то все”!

Рональд Рейген, американський патріот ірландського походження,  в молодості займався легкою атлетикою та плаванням, потім був радіо-журналістом, а згодом - кіноактором, що принесло йому найбільшу славу, перш, ніж він вирушив на політичний шлях. Покинувши Демократичну партію і ставши членом Республіканської партії, Рональд Рейген успішно кандидував на посаду губернатора штату Каліфорнії. Він двічі зазнав поразки в спробі стати Президентом США, але в 1980 р. світ побачив Рональда Рейгена господарем Білого Дому у Вашінгтоні.

Залізний ідеаліст, Рональд Рейген вміло поєднував свій ідеалізм зі своїм простим, не науково-філософським підходом до життя. Під кінець свого терміну в Білому Домі, в 1987 р., на запитання, як можна розпізнати комуніста, він слушно пояснив: „Комуніст, це той, хто читає Маркса і Леніна. Але, антикомуніст, це той, хто розуміє Маркса і Леніна”.

Після його повернення до приватного життя, а особливо - після його смерті, політологи та навіть звичайні люди, аналізуючи його політику, застановлятимуться, чи Рональд Рейген дійсно сам, як легендарний каменяр, розвалив Радянську імперію і визволив поневолені Москвою народи СРСР та Східної Європи, включно з українським. Неважливо, чи історія присудить Рональду Рейгену цю золоту сану чи ні. Важливіше, що знайшлася відповідна постать, на відповідній посаді, в відповідному часі, яка своїми настирливими, проникливо гострими антикомуністичними заявами, висловленими з амбони Білого Дому, почала розхитувати цю неморальну імперію та ідеологію, на якій вона була побудована.

Одночасно, треба зрозуміти, що його антикомуністичні почуття не були базовані лише на негативних пристрастях проти однієї ідеології. Рональд Рейген вірив у верховенство людини, в свободу людини, суспільства і народу, в якому вона живе. Виступаючи перед студентами американського університету Нотр-Дам в 1981 р., Рональд Рейген сказав, що наступні роки будуть славними і важливми для Америки, з огляду питання свободи та поширення цивілізації.  „Захід не обмежить комунізм, він його перевершить. Ми не старатимемося засудити його, а точніше - ми відкинено його, як сумний, звивехнений розділ людської історії, останні сторінки якої пишуться саме зараз”.

А студентам Московського Державного Університету в 1981 р. він так пояснив своє бачення свободи: „Свобода – це право пояснювати і змінювати прийнятий спосіб поведінки. Це – тривала революція ринку. Це – розуміння як впізнавати недоліки і шукати розв”язку”.

Виступаючи в Бритійському Парляменті, Рональд Рейген не знімив свою просту думку про свободу людини та народу: „Саме Радянський Союз – це течія, яка пливе проти історії. Марш свободи і демократії залишить марксизм і ленінізм на смітнику історії так, як вона залишила інших тиранів, які приголмшували свободу і накладали намордники на самовиявлення народу.”

І так 40-ий Президент США виповів війну комунізмові та Радянському Союзу. Але це не була кривава війна на жорстокому полі бою, вкритому трупами молодих вояків, а морально-духовна війна ідей, ідеологій, добра проти зла. Рональд Рейген навіки охрестив колишній СРСР імперією зла. Промовляючи на зібранні Національної Асоціації Євангелистів в Америці в березні 1983 р., Президент Рейген сказав: „Будьмо обережні, коли ми чуємо, що радянські керівники проповідують верховенство держави, заявляють про її перевагу над людиною і передбачують її панування над всіма народами світу. Насправді вони – приціл зла в модерному світі. Я звертаюся до вас з проханням: будьте обережні, не спокусіться! Ігнорувати історичні факти та агресивні наміри імперії зла, просто називаючи збройні перегони великим непорозумінням, виключає вас із боротьби добра проти зла”.

Навіть коли він намагався домовитися з Президентом СРСР Міхаїлом Горбачовим про скорочення ядерної зброї, Рональд Рейген бачив, що сама відсутність такої зброї масового винищування не принесе довгоочікувану свободу, незалежність та демократію поневоленим народам та мир людству. Під час нарад в Женеві Рональд Рейген мужньо заявив М. Горбачову: „Дозвольте мені сказати вам, чому ми вам не довіряємо”. Стоячи біля Берлінської Стіни, в 1987 р. він проголосив виклик намісникові Леніна і Сталіна: „Якщо ви шукаєте мир і добробут для Радянського Союзу і Східної Європи, підійдіть до цієї брами. Пане Горбачов, відкрийте цю браму. Пане Горбачов, розваліть цю стіну!”

В очах української діаспори в Америці, Рональд Рейген, як найважливіша політична фігура не тільки в США, а в цілому світі, начебто рівнявся з св. Юрієм - Переможцем, який боровся проти хижого змія. До нього були декілька президентів, які, залежно від часу та політичних пристрастей, по-різному відносилися до СРСР і поневолення України та інших народів Східної Європи. Тоді, коли відносини між Вашінгтоном і Москвою були кращі, вони відкрито не таврували московську імперію, хоча вони були зобов”язані підтримувати прагнення до незалежності тих народів у щорічній президентській проклямації відзначення Тижня Поневолених Народів, яке припадало в липні. Рональд Рейген постійно однаково відносився до комунізму та СРСР.

Відзначення Тижня Поневолених Народів було постійною гострою голкою в середині імперіалістичного ока Москви, і її генсеки часто домагалися від американських державних провідників усунення цього, на їхню думку, непотрібного закону. На щастя, ніхто з Президентів не відважився цього зробити.

Правдоподібно, проклямації підписані Президентом Рейгеном та його вступні заяви, були найзмістовніші з всіх подібних заяв від 1960 р., коли цей обряд був закарбований в законі. І чому ж би ні? Він краще всіх чітко розумів комунізм, московську імперію та історичне прагнення до незалежности українського та інших поневолених народу.

На відзначені Тижня Поневолених Народів, яке відбулося в Білому Домі, 19-го липня 1983 р., у присутності Достойного Ярослава Стецька, голови Українського Державного Правління і голови Проводу Організації Українських Націоналістів, Президент Рейген висловив свою найяскравішу особисту і державну підтримку поневоленим народам, сказвши: „Сьогодні ми розмовляємо з усіма народами Східної Європи, які є відокремлені від своїх рідних і близьких огидною залізною завісою. І кожній людині, яка є скута тиранією, чи то в Україні, Угорщині, Чехословачинні, Кубі чи В”єтнамі, ми надсилаємо вам нашу любов, нашу підтримку і запевняємо вас, що ви – не самі. Наше сповіщання вам є, що ваша боротьба є нашою боротьбою, ваші мрії є нашими мріями, колись ви також будете вільними! Так, як Папа Павло Іван сказав своїм улюбленим полякам, ми – благословенні божественною спадщиною. Ми – Божі діти, і ми не можемо бути рабами”!

Вісім років минуло, поки слова Рональда Рейгена стали дійсністю. Радянський Союз розвалився, і український народ став вільним, незалежним.

Президент Рейген також виявляв свою дотепність, навіть відносно таких серйозних питань, як його віра в перемогу над комунізмом і розвал Радянського Союзу. Одного дня в 1984 р. Президент Рейген мав необережність перевірити мікрофони перед його радіовиступом такою заявою: „Мої співвітчизники, американці. Я радий повідомити вас, що я підписав закон, який унезаконив Росію навіки. Бомбардування розпочнеться протягом п”яти хвилин”.

Дав би Бог, щоб в пам”ять останнього антикомуніста, імперія зла навіки була унезаконнена, і людству не буде потрібен черговий антикомуніст.

Another International Demand for Moscow to End its War vs. Ukraine

Another group of countries, supporters of Ukraine in its war against Russia, has issued a statement demanding Russia’s immediate cessation of hostilities against Ukraine and withdrawal from Crimea.

Fifteen member-states are part of the Arria-formula meetings, demanded that Moscow immediately cease its aggression against Ukraine.

“We call on Russia to immediately cease its aggression against Ukraine and end its occupation of Crimea and the egregious human rights abuses it inflicts on the Crimean population,” the group said in a statement issued by the Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom to the United Nations on June 2.

Arria-formula meetings are not formal meetings of the UN Security Council. They are convened at the initiative of a member or members of the Security Council in order to hear the views of individuals, organizations or institutions on matters within the competence of the Security Council.

The statement was supported by Albania, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Georgia, Marshall Islands, Moldova, Montenegro, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

The text reads:

“Russia held its fourth informal Arria-formula meeting since December 2020 at the UN today to once again promote a false narrative about Ukraine. We regret Russia’s deliberate and repeated misuse of the Arria-formula process to pervert the truth and obfuscate Russia’s malign activities. As we saw today, Russia invited speakers sanctioned by UN member states for their violations of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Russia’s false narratives about Ukraine are part of a disinformation campaign designed to destabilize and divert the attention of the international community. We recognize and appreciate the statement by the European Union, further demonstrating the international community’s unwavering support for Ukraine.

“The 2014 Revolution of Dignity saw Ukrainians exercise their right to peaceful assembly, demand a prosperous, democratic, and peaceful Ukraine, and reject Moscow’s influence. Russia’s response was to brazenly violate international principles, occupying Crimea and launching the conflict in eastern Ukraine that it perpetuates to this day. Russia is a party to the conflict, not a mediator. We fully support the Euro-Atlantic aspirations of the Ukrainian people, and continue to work with the government of Ukraine to help it fulfill the demands of the Revolution of Dignity in the face of continued Russian aggression. We reaffirm our resolute commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, within its internationally recognized borders and territorial waters.

“We call on Russia to immediately cease its aggression against Ukraine and end its occupation of Crimea and the egregious human rights abuses it inflicts on the Crimean population. We urge Russia to fulfill its Minsk commitments, including implementing an immediate and comprehensive ceasefire and withdrawing its military personnel and materiel from the territory of Ukraine.”

This is not the first statement by a subset of the United Nations to demand Moscow’s immediate end to its seven-year war against Ukraine, that has cost the lives of 14,000 Ukrainian civilians and soldiers, forced more than 1 million Ukrainians to flee their homes, caused the destruction of homes and cities as well as polluting the environment. Previously, UN General Assembly resolutions have formally declared Russia to be an aggressor state.

For the record and posterity, this is another step in the right direction but words and resolutions will not sway Moscow and Putin. Only actions will. And the most important action that the free world, the United States, European Union and NATO can undertake now is to accept Ukraine, the only country with battlefield experience in fighting the Russian war machine, into the North Atlantic alliance’s membership. That will send a needed strong signal to the Kremlin that Ukraine has active supporters that are committed to its long existence as an independent, sovereign country.

Ukraine Naturally Belongs in NATO

Baseball fans will appreciate this analogy from “61*” – Roger Maris had just missed hitting a historic homerun and sportswriter Milt Kahn sympathetically observes that the Yankee slugger “gave it a helluva shot.” To which his fellow reporter Artie Green mockingly replies that Maris failed because “The pressure got to him.”

Have patience, stay with me on this.

Kahn, with a deadpan expression, looks at Green and asks if he ever played baseball. “No, not really,” he answers.

“That’s what I thought,” the straight-faced Kahn comebacks in a soft-spoken indictment of his buddy’s clueless lack of understanding of the essence of baseball.

Yes, you may know how to write, you may even know baseball, its rules and statistics, but you don’t know the practical tactics and strategies that make up a player’s success or failure, you don’t know the vital contributing emotions, passions and pressures.

In the world of geopolitics and security, NATO members – the free world – would also have to meekly admit “No, not really” when asked if they ever fought in a war against Russia, the acknowledged enemy of democracy.

However, Ukraine has and NATO quite illogically continues to refuse to open its membership to this country with its well-experienced military.

The ancient concept of collective security is not an evil though some pundits and government officials have turned it into a perverted model of global relations by implying that safeguarding some – its members – from global threats and not others is sensible. That way the free world won’t upset or seem to threaten Russia and its allies while paying lip service to the former captive nations of Russian aggression, notably Ukraine.

NATO – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – was formed in 1949 by the United States, Great Britain, France and Canada to protect countries that adhere to their democratic and market principles against aggression by Moscow. A noble and necessary mission then and now. In the course of time, some have argued that the Russian threat has been replaced by radical Islamic countries. While the latter group has emerged as a genuine global threat, Russia has not withered in the noonday sun. Even though it dropped its Communist and Soviet monikers, Russia remains a threat to near and distant countries. The news media are filled with examples of Russian aggression by land, sea, air or cyberspace. Its war against Ukraine continues and Eastern and Western European countries have taken note and are preparing to avert Russian aggression.

For Moscow, Ukraine is its No.1 target that must be returned to its resurfacing prison of nations in order to propel itself to insurmountable global dominance.

Ukraine, finally, has seen the light of day or Russian artillery explosions and has formally and constitutionally established its goal of joining NATO as the Zelenskyy Administration is openly advocating this objective.

On paper, NATO seems to comprehend Ukraine’s dire situation and supports its existence while enunciating an “open-door” policy. In April, it stated that “A sovereign, independent and stable Ukraine, firmly committed to democracy and the rule of law, is key to Euro-Atlantic security. Relations between NATO and Ukraine date back to the early 1990s and have since developed into one of the most substantial of NATO’s partnerships. Since 2014, in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, cooperation has been intensified in critical areas.”

However, its unfortunate choice of the word “conflict” demonstrates its refusal to concede that Ukraine is ground zero of the seven-year Russo-Ukraine War, the only one in contemporary Europe. Calling it a conflict belies NATO’s commitment and tones down the gravity of the situation in hopes of avoiding any direct involvement. The ostrich hides its head in the sand.

NATO is preparing for a summit in Brussels on June 14 but Ukraine wasn’t invited. This doesn’t say much for the alliance’s support for Ukraine.

Predictably, this snub miffed Kyiv. Last week Ukraine decried the lack of progress in NATO’s “open-door” policy to membership and said it could not comprehend why it wasn’t invited when surely the war will be on the agenda.

“We understand the desire of the Allies to hold their own summit to discuss Trans-Atlantic unity. There are examples of such summits, including one in Brussels, in 2017. To be honest though, we don't understand at all how a closed-format NATO summit could be held against the background of the aggressive actions by the Russian Federation targeting Ukraine, in the Black Sea region, as well against the Allies,” Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba bemoaned, “How can you not invite Ukraine, how can you not find a format for Ukraine’s participation in the current summit?”

Speaking at a joint news conference with Helga Schmid, the secretary-general of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) who was visiting Kyiv, Kuleba expressed gratitude to NATO for its “constant confirmation of the open-door policy,” but added that not a single step had been taken to implement it.
“When we, in Ukraine, are accused of too slow reforms, what can we say about the adoption and implementation of the decisions of the alliance, which have been covered with dust for 13 years?” Kuleba insisted.
U.S. State Department spokesman Ned Price recently was guilty of stating the U.S. policy of supporting an “open door” to NATO for countries meeting “the standard for membership” that in his words meant that Ukraine must “implement the ... reforms necessary to build a more stable, democratic, prosperous and free country.”

This bogus issue must be taken off the table and cease being the basis of the free world’s whining against Ukraine. It is a poor excuse for excluding Ukraine from the alliance. To be sure those problems exist but they are being resolved – it’s a work in progress. Consider how much corruption exists in the anointed countries. However, these difficulties won’t be eliminated in an independent Ukraine if NATO dawdles with accession. Moscow will surely allow them to fester.

The prevailing argument that under current circumstances NATO shouldn’t admit Ukraine because it can’t is disingenuous. One point of the reasoning says there’s no consensus among the alliance’s 30-member states to do so, and no prospect of unanimous ratification by their parliaments. Many of those openly hypocritical countries should recall that they are fortunate to exist today after the devastation of World War II due to collective security in defeating a recognized enemy.

The naysayers argue that promising membership can only provide political grist to Russia’s propaganda mill, raise unattainable expectations in Ukraine followed by bitter disappointment, and, eventually, discredit NATO as a whole. First of all, the free world cannot seriously expect that any of its actions will ever be supported by Moscow’s propaganda mill, which is genuinely dedicated to Russia more than NATO’s propaganda mill is to freedom and democracy. Secondly, NATO members cannot be guided by fear of Moscow, which won’t benefit Ukraine nor them. The only unattainable expectation is NATO’s denial which will leave the Armed Forces of Ukraine fighting Russian invaders by themselves while the alliance looks on impassively. Inaction will sooner discredit NATO than anything else.

As many current statesmen have pointed out, Moscow’s belligerence must only be met by strict counter measures and not diplomatic warnings and debates.

Recent history – since Kyiv restored independence and sovereignty three decades ago – is filled with numerous examples of the Ukrainian nation overcoming internal and external threats against its existence as it endeavors to establish an independent, democratic, market-based country. Finally, once it became evident to Putin and the Kremlin that Ukraine can’t be coaxed back into its so-called sphere of influence, Moscow launched in 2014 its latest war against it. For seven years Ukraine has been successfully countering Russian aggression, recording unexpected battle victories, developing modern weapons, while rebuilding its decimated armed forces, and protecting not only itself but the wider region between the Baltic and Black seas. Indeed, all of Eastern and Western Europe. Ukraine has gained invaluable and unique experience deterring greater Russian aggression on the traditional, bloody battlefield and in the realm of hybrid warfare, which extends from cyber to disinformation and beyond. At the same time NATO strategists predict modern warfare on computer-generated battlefields.

Simultaneously, Ukraine has molded a nationally conscious population across all demographic and geographic segments.

The movement of Russian military forces near Ukraine’s border in early April should be a reminder to all members of NATO’s founding and unifying purpose: to safeguard freedom and preserve peace and security. Russia stood down a few weeks ago but the threat persists as tens of thousands enemy troops still bivouac near Ukraine. That mission is now more relevant than ever as NATO’s hopeful close partner Ukraine understands and the world should also that it can lose its freedom and territorial integrity without the strong signal that NATO membership conveys.

To be sure Ukraine’s Membership Action Plan – the first step toward accession – is merely a weak stopgap that will not accomplish anything. It will not keep Moscow at bay. The situation on Ukraine’s border with Russia continues to deteriorate and will not improve anytime soon. Only Ukraine’s immediate acceptance into NATO will declare the following: the free world is committed beyond mere words to Ukraine’s independence and sovereignty and its Euro-Atlantic choice; Moscow must evacuate from Ukraine and withdraw its forces deep into Russia, and the free world has a genuine proactive guardian of its interests on the ramparts of freedom.

These factors make Ukraine a genuine candidate for NATO membership and the United States, the international community and the alliance must support it now to safeguard their own freedom.

Moscow Endorses Genocide by Voting No on UN Resolution

The 193 delegations to the United Nations on May 18 participated in a discussion about Item 135 – A/75/L.82 – Responsibility to Protect and for the Prevention of Genocide, War Crimes, Ethnic Cleansing and Crimes against Humanity.

Given the state of affairs around the world today and yesteryear, this certainly is a vital topic that requires never-ending discussion, monitoring, endorsement and compliance. And in the event of noncompliance and transgressions – repentance, penance, punishment, retribution and reconciliation.

The universal significance and morality of this resolution was enunciated by Oleksiy Ilnytskyi, counsellor of the Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations, who said in his presentation: “We fully agree with the report provisions that prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity is ‘an ongoing process that requires sustained efforts to build the resilience of societies by promoting respect for the rule of law and human rights without discrimination; establishing legitimate and accountable national institutions; eliminating corruption; managing diversity constructively; and supporting a strong and diverse civil society and a pluralist media.’”

Who can dispute such high moral principles?

The member-states overwhelmingly voted in favor of this resolution but 15 UN member-states said, “No.” Heading the list of countries that voted against the adoption of this resolution was Russia and its vassal Belarus.

Genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity read like a laundry list of crimes and transgressions committed by Moscow for hundreds of years against its population as well as foreign nations. Just consider the Holodomor – Moscow’s murder by starvation of 7 million Ukrainian men, women and children in 1932-33. Or the murder of 200,000 innocent Ukrainians at the start of World War II and their burial in a mass grave in Bykivnia. And the unprovoked invasion of Ukraine by Russia in 2014 and the war that has lasted since then. And this is only a partial list of possible transgressions raised in Item 135 – A/75/L.82.

An obvious explanation why Moscow did not vote in favor of this resolution is that a lawbreaker does not voluntarily admit to committing any crime. Why leave the door perpetually open to international scrutiny of questionable activity? Even if you know you committed the crime in question and everyone knows you did it, it’s best not to admit anything and deny your guilt.

By refusing to support this humanitarian-based resolution, was Moscow overcome with as much guilt and remorse for its heinous crimes as perpetrators of matricide feel about their evil actions – the Norman Bates of “Psycho” syndrome?

Ironically, with this vote, Moscow surely attracted the attention and ignominy of the international community by shamelessly saying that it opposes preventing genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.

For an answer, we’ll have to wait for Russia’s admission.

On the other hand, Ukraine’s Oleksiy Ilnytskyi told his fellow delegates that Ukraine was proud to be major sponsor of this resolution and “is a party to the core instruments of international law relating to prevention of atrocity crimes, protection of populations, upholding human rights and elimination of all forms of discrimination.”

Sadly, he continued, not all countries support this message as is demonstrated by Russia’s current and past illegal actions.

Building up to detailing Russia’s ongoing aggression against Ukraine, Ilnytskyi pointed out that “Ukraine has already expressed on many occasions its strong belief that R2P (the shorthand nomenclature for the resolution) concept fully excludes any possibility of covert usage of military force by one state against another state under pretext of population protection leading to occupation of the territory.”

Devious countries still exploit the R2P for strategic and security purposes even after being denounced by numerous United Nations resolutions, he said. Russia was singled out several times for condemnation by the UN for invading and then temporarily occupying the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea which showed Moscow’s “total intolerance to manipulations of R2P principles.” Russian occupation authorities continue to block access to Crimea for international human rights groups to assess the situation on the ground and make respective recommendations for early warning, Ilnytskyi charged. In the meanwhile, Moscow has transported troops and equipment and installed nuclear weapons on the Crimean peninsula.

“That country also neglects the life and safety of people of Ukraine in certain temporary occupied areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions and conducts actions in contradiction of spirit and letter of R2P, that have to be immediately ceased,” the Ukrainian diplomat said. “At the same time, the ongoing occupation of parts of its territory limits Ukraine’s ability to implement Pillar I of R2P. In Crimea, the Russian occupation regime continues to deny access for international human rights observers, including the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine.”

Ilnytskyi warned that inaction as well as impunity will result in a perpetuation of these singularly monstrous crimes that result in pain and suffering, and threaten regional and global security and peace.

“I would like to underline that the impunity for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, unwillingness to investigate and prosecute those responsible for these crimes including massive, serious or systematic violations of human rights and international humanitarian law will lead to their recurrence and undermine our multilateral efforts with regards to R2P,” he said.

For criminal states like Russia, the existence of global tolerance and blindness for their transgressions is a carte blanche for continuing crimes against humanity without regard for the blood that they’ve already spilled.

After Resounding Support for Ukraine, President Biden Caves

I first felt the stinging venom from my wife. So you had decided to vote for Joe Biden because Donald Trump didn’t give you a strong enough impression that he’d support Ukraine, did you?

Mea culpa.

Her caustic condemnation of President Biden on many counts complemented the chorus of conservative pundits around the country that are castigating the commander in chief for screwing up a wide range of policies and programs in just slightly over 100 days.

Our kitchen debate that resounded around the world specifically pertains to President Biden’s shocking decision yesterday to waive sanctions against an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin who heads the company that is building the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany – Moscow’s veiled imperialistic gambit, according to a handful of media sources.

Did the President suffer from a sudden bout of weak knees or cold feet? Or was he out rightly lying all along and then in the penultimate moment sold Ukraine – America’s proclaimed strategic partner and best ally in defending of the free world – down the river?

President Biden, since his inauguration, gave Ukraine, Ukrainian Americans and surely the former captive nations a welcome sense of understanding and support for Ukraine and indignant opposition to the occupants of the Kremlin – in marked contrast to President Trump’s policies.

The White House’s move is likely to draw criticism from lawmakers and a host of others who have argued that several pipe-laying vessels and entities, including Nord Stream-2 AG and its CEO, could be subject to sanctions under the Protecting Europe’s Energy Security Act of 2019, known as PEESA. The recently adopted Ukraine Security Partnership Act as amended states it “Requires the President to report to Congress within 15 days whether Nord Stream-2 AG, the company building the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and 19 other entities are eligible for sanctions under the Protecting Europe’s Energy Security Act.”

Furthermore, Congressional Ukraine Caucus, in a statement reaffirming support for Ukraine in face of increased Russian aggression, noted: “We were proud to spearhead Congressional efforts to increase Ukraine’s defense security assistance from $250 to $275 million for FY21, as well as to place mandatory sanctions on Nord Stream-2 through legislation. We agree with the Administration that the Kremlin should face serious consequences if it escalates its aggression against Ukraine. We must continue to raise the cost on Russia’s ongoing aggression through increased sanctions and putting an end to Nord Stream-2. Defenders of liberty from around the entire world stand with our Ukrainian allies.”

Republican lawmakers, with the help of their colleagues from the other side of the aisle, had pushed the Biden Administration to use financial punishments to stop the pipeline.

“If the Putin regime is allowed to finish this pipeline, it will be because the Biden Administration chose to let it happen,” Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said via a statement from his office. “I want to be clear: this pipeline is not a simple commercial project that could frustrate our relationship with Berlin. It is a Russian malign influence project that threatens to deepen Europe’s energy dependence on Moscow, render Ukraine more vulnerable to Russian aggression and provide billions of dollars to Putin’s coffers.”

The Oval Office will also catch the ire of Ukrainian American voters. It will be hard pressed to defend or explain its new position, which is detrimental to Ukraine’s independence and sovereignty. The German-backed Nord Stream 2 pipeline is “a Russian geopolitical project intended to divide Europe and weaken European energy security”, the Secretary of State Antony Blinken, warned on the eve of his triumphant visit to Kyiv.

With the pipeline so close to completion there was an expectation that the US would feel the issue was a lost cause, but Blinken insisted in a statement that firms involved in the project should immediately abandon work or face sanctions. He said the Biden Administration was intent on complying with existing bipartisan Congress legislation that calls for sanctions against those working on the project. He said the US was tracking those entities believed to be involved in the project.

The Baltic Sea pipeline that bypasses Ukraine – so depriving the country of significant revenues – is 90% complete and could even be operational by June.

Ironically, Blinken’s warning came the day after President Biden surprisingly acknowledged on national television that Putin was a killer, a description that pleased adversaries of the Kremlin and prompted Moscow to withdraw his ambassador to Washington.

Secretary of State Blinken’s trip to Ukraine was undeniably an effort to show Ukrainians, Russia and the world that “we stand with them, including against any aggression from Russia,” as Blinken put it in a recent interview with MSNBC. Few in Washington objected to this language, which echoes other Biden administration statements and actions as well as the popular idea the United States should protect Ukraine from Russia. Expectations ran high that Washington would not stand down from supporting Kyiv in any way possible against Moscow.

Furthermore, Blinken had promised to oppose it during his confirmation hearing: “I am determined to do whatever we can to prevent that completion (of Nord Stream 2).”

During Blinken’s visit to Ukraine, in a press huddle, a senior State Department official confirmed that Nord Stream 2 was a topic of discussion in Kyiv.

“It was mentioned, their position on Nord Stream 2 – Ukraine’s – and their concerns about that, and the Secretary reflected the concerns that we have about it too, and what we’ve continued to make clear to the Germans, of course the Russians as well, that we think it’s a bad idea, a damaging project, but there’s also U.S. law involved in terms of reacting to that.”

Despite this hopeful build up, Washington flip-flopped.

“The Biden Administration has been clear that the Nord Stream-2 pipeline is a Russian geopolitical project that threatens European energy security and that of Ukraine and eastern flank NATO Allies and partners,” a spokesperson was quoted as saying yesterday. “We continue to examine entities involved in potentially sanctionable activity and have made it clear that companies risk sanctions if they are involved in Nord Stream 2.”

Waiving sanctions against this Russian project is also opposed by the former captive nations of Russian subjugation that see its inherent danger.

During a major meeting of Eastern European leaders in Warsaw at the start of this month, the Polish foreign ministry said Polish Foreign Minister Zbigniew Rau and his Ukrainian counterpart Dmytro Kuleba discussed the “threats to peace in Europe resulting from the escalation of tensions along the northern and eastern border of Ukraine and in occupied Crimea, and from the construction of Nord Stream 2.”

In conversations with Kuleba, Rau noted that both officials agreed that the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline threatens Europe.

“We see clearly that this project allows synchronization of pressure—political, economic, and military. This pipeline, if completed, will create a state of clear and present danger to peace in Europe,” Rau said.

Nord Stream 2 plainly isn’t a singular issue of importance to Ukraine. Its construction has serious security and geopolitical ramifications for the region, which should not be demeaned by Washington.

Is President Biden kowtowing to German Chancellor Angela Merkel? Or is he atoning before Putin for his pro-Ukraine position? Answers are not yet forthcoming. But if truth be told, this is not how you build a strong, proactive American foreign policy that has to defend global peace and security for some four years. Putin undoubtedly is smirking at Biden’s weakness.

The President should not allow Russia to use Western business interests, if that’s a reason, to undermine policy principles. The debacle over the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline is a classic example of how a “business first” approach to international relations conflicts with political objectives and weakens solidarity among strategic partners on this side of a re-emerging iron curtain.

This scandalous about face seen round the world certainly calls into question President Biden’s leadership of the free world and leaves egg on his face.

And payback will be costly.

Putin’s Latest ‘Mein Kampf’

Amid an impressive but predictable display of military firepower and manpower, Moscow’s fuhrer Vladimir Putin articulated his latest version of Hitler's “Mein Kampf” during Russia’s commemoration of what it claims is its victory over Nazi Germany, warning all countries not to push Russia.

In case it is pushed up against a wall, Putin put all opponents on notice that Russia will not hesitate to defend itself.

“The war brought upon us so many unbearable ordeals, grief and tears that it is impossible to forget. Those who are plotting new aggressions cannot be forgiven or justified,” Putin declared menacingly on Sunday, May 9. He said his country will “firmly” defend Russia’s national interests, denouncing the return of “Russophobia.”

The Russian leader couched his threats against adversaries in an ironic series of fake allusions that reveal steps he’s taken to preserve Holy Mother Russia, more commonly known as the evil empire.

Putin castigated those who persist in promoting Nazi ideology and the “delusional theory of their own supremacy” while he seeks to preserve Russia’s global dominance by invading and occupying Ukraine, keeping troops in Syria, killing and imprisoning his enemies, and creating civic calamity in the United States. He noted apparently with a straight face that he doesn’t only mean “radicals and international terrorist groups” who are a threat, but “surviving members of those killing squads” who are trying to “rewrite history” – the latter activity being high on Putin’s list of daily to-dos.

For example, speaking of rewriting history, according to the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, Russia will soon make it illegal to mention the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement that made Moscow and Berlin allies at the start of World War 2 because that would make it difficult to exonerate Stalin of Hitler’s crimes. The draft bill registered on May 5 would also prohibit “the denial of the decisive role of the Soviet people in the defeat of Nazi Germany and the humanitarian mission of the USSR in liberating the countries of Europe.” Its authors are the head of the State Duma committee on culture Yelena Yampolskaya; the First Deputy Speaker of the Duma Alexander Zhukov and senator Alexei Pushkov.  All are from the ruling ‘United Russia’ party, and the bill has, apparently, been drawn up in compliance with instructions from Putin as the result of a meeting of the President’s Committee on Culture and Art on October 27, 2020.

Putin also commended the Soviet army for being a “generation of victors” and demonstrating the “ultimate heroism” during crucial battles and the “harshest times of war.” Noting the valor of the Soviet army to today, Putin called the “descendants of the victorious troops” that serve in the Russian Armed Forces a “guarantee” in its commitment to protecting national interests.

Just to keep the record straight, the Soviet army before, during and after the Second World War committed a proven range of crimes against the innocent population of Ukraine and other countries. And today, the “valiant” Russian cutthroat soldiers and their bloodthirsty mercenary comrades invaded in violation of the UN Charter and other international accords Ukraine and continue Russia’s tradition of perpetuating crimes against humanity.

Indeed, they deserve the Adolf Hitler Medal of Honor.

Putin’s ludicrous lies continue as he falsely boasted: “The Soviet people kept their sacred oath, defended the homeland, and freed the countries of Europe from the black plague. Russia consistently defends international law. At the same time, we will firmly defend our national interests to ensure the safety of our people.”

Soviet Russia freed countries from Nazi oppression and then installed its subjugation on Ukraine, the Baltic States and Eastern Europe until 1991.

Gratefully, more and more Ukrainians, especially the post-subjugation generation, as I wrote in my previous blogpost, do not believe Moscow’s propaganda and condemn Stalin, his junta and army for the murderous imperialists that they have been.