Tag Archives: foreign policy

Yes, He Can

Posted on by
Reply

Since Russia President Vladimir Putin—the man then-Presidential candidate Joe Biden (D) bragged was so afraid of him—invaded Ukraine, oil prices have gone up to levels not seen since the Obama years, even beyond the inflation levels Biden-Harris’ current war on our energy industry had already driven them: $105/barrel. Biden-Harris proclaimed last Thursday,

I know this is hard and that Americans are already hurting. I will do everything in my power to limit the pain the American people are feeling at the gas pump.

Jason Furman, one of ex-President Barack Obama’s (D) economic minions, claims—and he’s actually serious—

This is a world price and the president is largely powerless to do much[.]

Both men are being cynically disingenuous; Biden-Harris’ dissembling, though, given his position in our current government and on the world’s stage, is especially pernicious.

Our President actually could do quite a bit about oil prices for our nation and for our friends and allies; he could do quite a bit about energy prices generally, were he not in thrall to the “green” extreme Left.

He could, for instance, reopen the Keystone XL pipeline and work to get Canada to reopen oil flows from its end.

He could get out of the way of drilling leases on Federal land.

He could get out of the way of fracking for domestic oil and natural gas.

He could get out of the way of American exports of oil and liquid natural gas to Europe.

He could rescind the myriad anti-hydrocarbon regulations he enacted via Executive Order or that he had his several Cabinets enact through rules.

The list is really quite extensive.

Biden-Harris has moved to release oil from our strategic reserve, but that’s merely insulting in its puniness and in its use to distract from energy price inflation.

Instead, Biden-Harris is allowing energy prices, especially those for oil and natural gas, to rise rapidly, and that benefits no one more than it benefits Russia, which needs high oil prices to support its budget—especially during its assault on Ukraine.

An Accurate Read of the Emasculated West

Posted on by
1

This time, it’s not Russian President Vladimir Putin or People’s Republic of China President Xi Jinping. It’s Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in his very early Friday morning (our time) statement.

This morning we are defending our state alone. Like yesterday, the world’s most powerful forces are watching from afar[.]

Indeed. Safe and comfortable in their seats high in the coliseum as they watch the mayhem down on the sand.

And:

Did yesterday’s sanctions convince Russia? We hear in our sky and see on our earth that this was not enough.

And this:

Today, I have asked 27 European leaders whether Ukraine will be in NATO. I have asked directly—everyone is afraid, no one answers.

Finally,

But we are not afraid. We are not afraid of anything. We are not afraid to defend our country, we are not afraid of Russia, we are not afraid to talk to Russia, we are not afraid to talk about anything, about security guarantees for our country, we are not afraid of talking about neutrality, we are not NATO members at the moment. But what guarantees will we get? And most importantly which countries will give us those guarantees?

What will Ukraine get in the way of guarantees? What would be the value of those guarantees, were any to come? The Budapest Memorandum was a guarantee by the US, Great Britain, and Russia of Ukraine’s political, economic, and territorial integrity if they gave up their nuclear weapons. Those three signatories betrayed Ukraine when they welched on the Memorandum. The first Minsk accords? They were another early betrayal of Ukraine and codified the Budapest “guarantee’s” destruction, a betrayal perpetrated by those same three signers. Minsk II? Again, betrayal. These are the countries that will give new “guarantees.” And now Putin invades.

“No one answers.” The “sanctions” levied by Biden-Harris and his timorous fellows in Europe are insulting in their weakness. The ex-comedian who leads a nation under attack has far more courage and deserves—as does his nation—far more aid, concrete aid, than he’s getting. Aid far more constructive than cheers for his nation and tongue-clucks for Russia, safely delivered from those high up seats.

Sadly, disgustingly, I have to share Zelenskyy’s contempt for these Western…persons…but most especially for Biden-Harris; he, and they, are not leaders. Merely cheerleaders in the stands.

Mistaken

Posted on by
Reply

Tulsi Gabbard thinks Putin’s invasion of Ukraine could have been avoided had President Joe Biden (D) and European politicians only recognized Russian President Vladimir Putin’s security concerns vis-à-vis Ukraine membership in NATO.

This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO, which would mean US/NATO forces right on Russia’s border

Gabbard is badly mistaken in this, for a number of reasons.

  1. The Biden-Harris administration and NATO had already acknowledged Putin’s security concerns here, and rejected them. Ukraine’s membership in NATO is a matter for sovereign Ukraine and the sovereign NATO nations to accept or reject, not for Putin to dictate to them.
  2. Putin’s putative security concerns regarding Ukraine are not his aim, but merely a tool in his drive to reconstitute the 20th century Russian empire—which loss he considered the geopolitical tragedy of the century and which reconstitution he made explicitly his goal in his Monday night speech.
  3. NATO is a defensive alliance with no designs on Russia beyond defending the member nations against a demonstrably aggressively acquisitive Russia.
    1. Georgia, which Putin’s Russia has invaded, partitioned, and occupied those partitions
    2. Ukraine, which Putin’s Russia already has invaded once, partitioned, and occupied those earlier partitions
    3. The Baltic States and Poland, which Russia has already attacked, more than once each, with cyber war break-ins and hacks
    4. Russia’s repeated use of energy extortion against Ukraine, Europe through Ukraine, and lately Germany explicitly
    5. Russia’s shutdown of Colonial Pipeline, in response to which Biden-Harris meekly lifted the sanctions against Russia’s Nordstream 2
  4. Putin’s Russia has no security concerns from the West except in his own fetid imagination. Russia has nothing at all that the West wants that can’t be gotten far more cheaply through freely done and mutually beneficial trade.

Regarding that last point, if there’s a security risk, it comes from People’s Republic of China President Xi Jinping, who’s long had designs on Siberia, which generations of PRC governments, and China governments before them, consider Russia to have stolen from China. That risk already is in progress of realization via the economic deal that Putin and Xi signed just a couple of short years ago that enables Siberia’s rich resources to be jointly exploited by Russia and the PRC—with PRC citizens doing the vast bulk of the labor and moving into (functionally colonizing) Siberia in order to do that work.

No, what led Putin to invade Ukraine this time, with his intent to conquer and occupy the nation, was Western—including our own nation—mild acquiescence in those prior aggressions, invasions, and occupations. If Putin isn’t crushed in Ukraine, he won’t stop there. All of eastern Europe, including what used to be the German Democratic Republic will be at risk. And so will be the Republic of China, Japan, Republic of Korea, Australia, and the United States.

Meek

Posted on by
Reply

Not merely weak. That’s the response of the US and Europe to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

The coordinated US and European actions fall short of the package of sanctions threatened by the administration if Moscow launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine

Never mind that there is no such thing as a less-than full-scale invasion of a sovereign nation. Either a hostile nation invades, or it does not. And Russia has invaded Ukraine.

Nor is it a surprise that the Biden-Harris administration’s threats of serious sanctions far exceeded Biden-Harris’ actions. The highly (self-)touted 40-year foreign policy expert is too timorous to act seriously in the face of a serious enemy. Former SecDef Robert Gates’ characterization of Biden’s foreign policy chops are proven still accurate eight years later. Only today, Biden-Harris’ failure is exceedingly dangerous for our nation, for our friends, for our allies.

That package of wrist-slaps and virtue-signals consists of

  • blacklisting two major banks and
  • halting the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline

That second is a misrepresentation of what’s been done. All Germany is doing is “delaying” certification of Nordstream 2.

Other parts of the package include

  • Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said Japan, like the US, would ban the trade of new Russian sovereign debt
  • sanction individuals connected to the breakaway regions.
  • Prime Minister Scott Morrison said Australia would impose travel bans
  • [impose] targeted financial sanctions on eight members of Russia’s Security Council
  • Canada said its sanctions would target state-backed Russian lenders
  • ban Canadians from buying sovereign Russian debt.

“You can’t come here.” Yeah, that’ll show Putin and his cronies. Pretending that sanctioning a few individuals—who’ve also already moved their money—is a serious action is insulting to the rest of us. The sovereign debt bit could be serious, except that Putin has his BFF and…mentor…People’s Republic of China President Xi Jinping backing him economically. The sovereign debt bit is necessary, but it’s far from sufficient.

And this risible move, planned for some time in the future:

The Biden administration plans to impose sanctions on the company constructing the Nord Stream 2 pipeline….

To what end, I have to wonder? The pipeline’s construction is completed, and the pipeline has moved into Germany’s certification stage.

No one is contemplating cutting Russia off altogether from western funds, which would push him into complete dependency on Xi’s good offices. No one contemplating even sanctioning Putin.

No one is contemplating shipping offensive weapons to Ukraine so that nation would have a chance, not of merely holding on, but actually defeating Putin’s invasion and driving the Russians back out of Ukraine altogether. No one is contemplating even sending Ukraine sufficient defensive arms that they even can hold on. Germany is, though, still actively interfering with any arms shipments at all for Ukraine.

Indeed,

A key calculation among officials on both sides of the Atlantic is how hard to hit if Russia occupies parts of eastern Ukraine beyond the separatist-held areas and to what extent to maintain some deterrence in case Moscow moves to take the rest of the country[.]

It’s a simple calculation, really, or should be. Hit Russia without limit economically and politically, and ready our respective military establishments. We should have learned from Vietnam that gradual, or graduated, response is the path to ultimate and bloody defeat. Hit Russia now, faster than Putin can respond. Putin, as noted above, has already invaded Ukraine; now he must be driven out altogether.

And: Russia has already invaded Ukraine, there is nothing left to deter.

And, and: Putin said quite clearly what his goals were in his Monday night address to his nation. Those goals include that Ukraine isn’t a nation, it’s a part of Russia, and he means to “recover” it. His larger goal is to reconstitute the 20th century Russian empire of SSRs orbiting the Russian SSR along with the client states beyond the SSRs. Why is it, also, that western managers (we don’t have any actual leaders today) continue to turn deaf ears to what our enemies say when they tell us what they’re going to do? Germany, especially, should be attending to that larger statement of Putin’s: one of the client states Putin means to recover is the German Democratic Republic—East Germany.

Instead, the goal of today’s western nation managers seems to be to ensnare Putin in a Ukrainian quagmire, to bleed Ukrainian men and women—and children as inevitable “collateral damage”—in the effort while the rest of these nations sit in the Coliseum seats, cheering.

Using the Power Ceded to Them

Posted on by
Reply

OPEC once again has rejected pleas to increase oil production in the face of rising oil prices.

Ministers of Arab oil-producing countries gathered in Saudi Arabia on Sunday, refusing pressure for OPEC+ to increase production again amid coronavirus pandemic recovery efforts and as a potential war looms in Europe.

And

On Sunday, Saudi energy minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman told an industry conference in Riyadh how the pandemic and recovery efforts have “taught us the value of caution,” Reuters reported.

Bin Salman and his OPEC counterparts also have learned another thing: the value of supporting Russia—the major OPEC ally that adds the ‘+’ to OPEC—rather than a timid and irresolute Progressive-Democrat American administration.

Bin Salman and his OPEC counterparts also have been reminded of OPEC’s economic power as the world’s major oil producer, a power the organization also wielded against the US in the ’70s when we really were dependent on Middle East oil for our economy.

The difference today, of course, is that we have no need to be dependent on others—not OPEC, not an enemy nation oil and natural gas exporter—for our economic independence (which means our political independence, also). Our current dependency is solely the work of President Joe Biden (D) via his active war on our energy production industry and his surrender to Russia on Nordstream 2 after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s minions shut down Colonial Pipeline as a demonstration of things to come if Biden didn’t yield.