Author: John Hanno

Miami Herald

Our leaders’ contempt for the truth has led us into war | Opinion

Leonard Pitts Jr. – February 25, 2022

Then as now, it began with lies.

On Sept. 1, 1939, Adolf Hitler’s forces crossed the border into Poland. The German chancellor did so on the pretext that ethnic Germans were being persecuted. German operatives, disguised as Poles, even staged an attack on a German radio station, yelling anti-German threats into the microphone.

With that lie, the most devastating war in the history of the world began.

It is far too early to know how devastating this latest European war will turn out to be, how many will die, how many will be left homeless and stateless, how the repercussions will play out across the globe. There is, however, an ominous resonance in the lies from which it arose.

First, Russian leader Vladimir Putin claimed he had no intention of invading Ukraine, even as he massed troops on that country’s border. Then he announced Russia would recognize two separatist regions. Finally, shortly before Russian ordnance began to pound the smaller country, he announced a “military operation” aimed at “peacekeeping” and “denazification.”

Now, as then, lies. And now, as then, what strikes you is not just the utter brazenness of them, but the threadbare flimsiness of them. Hitler, granted, put some work into his lie, but at the end of the day, was anyone really expected to believe that Poland, which had more horses than tanks, had suddenly decided to attack its heavily armed neighbor?

Putin’s lies are even shoddier. He would have us believe his forces were needed to keep the peace in a nation that was at peace and to evict Nazis from a nation whose democratically elected president is a Jew. These are the kinds of lies you tell when you don’t care what anyone thinks. Their very shabbiness is an expression of contempt.

And the fact that Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, J.D. Vance, Steve Bannon and other denizens of the American right either lionize this liar — “Savvy,” Trump called him — or dismiss the suffering of his victims — “I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine,” said Vance — is a clear, albeit superfluous indicator of just how broken our own country has become.

Like Putin, much of the right bears allegiance not to truth, much less to democracy, but rather, to the brutish power of the strongman to do as he pleases, unfettered by such niceties. That’s what they very nearly imposed in 2016. It is what they promise in 2024. And if you’re not frightened, you’re not paying attention.

This moment has been a long time coming. A little more than a quarter century ago, a House speaker named Newt Gingrich declared politics war and an upstart cable network called Fox declared facts optional. It was called a conservative resurgence, but it was actually the foundation stone for the kingdom of lies our country has become.

No wonder Trump likes Putin and claims the feeling is mutual. Each recognizes himself in the other.

What they recognize, what they have in common, is that transactional disdain for the truth and, more to the point, for anyone naive enough to expect it. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented her Russian counterpart a red “reset” button, Russia accepted it, but kept right on being a thugocracy. TV pundits kept assuring us Trump was going to “become presidential” any second now, but to his last day, he remained a willful child. Now families seek refuge in Ukrainian subways, while Trump cheers their tormentor on.

Let no one be surprised.

What begins in lies tends to end in carnage.

Washington Post – Global Opinion

Opinion: I did not vote for Ukraine’s president. His courage has changed my mind and inspired millions.

By Anna Myroniuk – February 27, 2022

Anna Myroniuk is a journalist and the head of investigations at the Kyiv Independent.

“Captain Ukraine,” the first “true” president of Ukraine, a hero, a leader. I would have never thought I would see people use these terms to refer to Volodymyr Zelensky.

Back in 2019, I did not vote for him. Like some other Ukrainians, I did not believe Zelensky, a comedian, actor and entertainer with no experience in politics, was suited for the job. His campaign was idealistic but lacked substance. He was often vague and raised concerns about where he stood toward Russia. He had his own powerful backer, the billionaire who owned the TV station that broadcast “Servant of the People,” the show that made Zelensky a star. But he won with overwhelming support.

I was not impressed by his administration. He promised to fight corruption but, as an investigative reporter, I saw how his efforts were selective. He appointed loyalists and friends to powerful posts, and his allies rarely faced consequences when they were snared in scandals. In his first three years in office, he showed a true populist side. He loved to be loved. He was also very sensitive to media criticism.

But Zelensky showed some promising signs as well. He refused to give in to Putin’s demands to break up Ukraine to sell in parts. He rejected to negotiate peace in Donbas with Russia-appointed leaders and suggested an invitation to the discussion be extended to the natives of war-torn Donbas who relocated to Kyiv. Russia was not happy.

As a broader conflict with Russia loomed, Zelensky annoyed the public by repeatedly downgrading the threat of an invasion. It appeared as though he was in denial, which gave Ukrainians a reason to lose faith in him.

Many left the country weeks ago out of fear that Ukraine would surrender if Putin invaded. Many wondered whether Zelensky would fight back. I must admit that I left Kyiv for another city nearby a few days ago for this same reason.

But now, many of my colleagues and I are trying to find ways to return to the capital to cover the resistance there. Zelensky’s brave response has made me reconsider. Ukraine’s leadership is not surrendering. Many experts thought Kyiv would fall in 24 hours — but four days later the battle continues.

I’m glad Zelensky has proved skeptics wrong such as myself. A new poll shows his approval rating at 91 percent, three times what it was in December. His defense of Ukraine deserves praise. His bravery is inspiring. When the United States offered to evacuate him amid concerns for his safety, he replied: “The fight is here; I need ammunition, not a ride.”

The actor-turned-president stumbled and did not live up to my expectations at first — but now he has demonstrated that he is not shying away from the biggest responsibility for any national leader: the protection of their people.

I, as a journalist, will keep covering Zelensky with independence and rigor, praising him or calling out his mistakes when necessary. The pressure will only increase. Zelensky has the trust of the nation and a big part of the world. I hope he keeps it up.

Politico – Canada

With the world watching Putin, Trump targets Trudeau

“The tyranny we have witnessed in Canada in recent weeks should shock and dismay people all over the world,” Trump said Saturday night.

By Andy Blatchford – February 27, 2022

OTTAWA — Donald Trump fired up the Conservative Political Action Conference crowd Saturday night with a barrage of accusations directed at what would have been an unthinkable target just weeks ago: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“The radical left is trying to replace American democracy with woke tyranny,” the former U.S. president told his audience in Orlando, Fla., drawing a shower of boos in agreement. “They want to do the same thing to America that Trudeau has been doing to Canada — and much, much worse.”

His focus on Trudeau comes as Russian President Vladimir Putin wages war on Ukraine.

But Trump and MAGA boosters see a way to score points by hammering away at Trudeau over Canada’s Covid measures and the response to trucker convoy protests.

Convoy organizers, whose campaign blocked Canada-U.S. border crossings and swallowed downtown Ottawa for three weeks, billed their movement as pushback against Covid restrictions and Trudeau’s vaccine mandate for truckers.

Trudeau helped extinguish the protests about a week ago by granting authorities extraordinary emergency powers. Security experts and Trudeau government officials warned that a group within the movement had plans to overthrow the government.

In the days that followed his invocation of the Emergencies Act, hundreds of police officers flooded Ottawa to quell what had become an occupation. The act also enabled banks to freeze the accounts of some protesters and supporters.

The Canadian convoys drew enthusiastic support, financial injections and widespread attention in the U.S. Right-leaning Americans sent millions of dollars to help fund the campaign.

Trump’s attacks Saturday on Trudeau, which brought the audience to its feet, focused on the Canadian government’s response to the truckers’ “Freedom Convoy.”

The former president told one of the Republican Party’s most high-profile events of the year that if Democrats want to fight for democracy abroad, “they should start with the democracy that is under threat right next door, a place called Canada.”

“The tyranny we have witnessed in Canada in recent weeks should shock and dismay people all over the world,” Trump said. “A line has been crossed — you’re either with the peaceful truckers or you are with the left-wing fascists.”

BuzzFeed News

A Team Of American And British Special Forces Veterans Are Preparing To Join Ukraine’s Fight Against Russia

The 10 NATO-trained war veterans are taking up President Volodymyr Zelensky’s offer for people to join a new unit of foreign fighters for Ukraine.

Christophe Miller, Reporting From Kyiv, Ukraine –  February 27, 2022

KYIV — A group of 10 special operations forces veterans are staging in Poland and preparing to cross into Ukraine, where they plan to take up President Volodymyr Zelensky on his offer to “join the defense of Ukraine, Europe, and the world,” according to a US Army veteran arranging their passage.

The group, composed of six US citizens, three Brits, and a German, are NATO-trained and experienced in close combat and counterterrorism. They want to be among the first to officially join the new International Legion of the Territorial Defense of Ukraine that Zelensky announced Sunday, according to text messages reviewed by BuzzFeed News. Two former American infantry officers are also making plans to come to Ukraine to provide “leadership” for the group, the Army veteran recruiter said.

As intense fighting raged in the Ukrainian capital for the fourth day and Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered nuclear deterrence forces on high alert, Zelensky urged people around the world who can help fight Moscow’s “vile tactics” to enlist in Ukraine’s armed forces.

“This is the beginning of a war against Europe, against European structures, against democracy, against basic human rights, against a global order of law, rules, and peaceful coexistence,” Zelensky said in a statement announcing a decree on the creation of the unit. “Anyone who wants to join the defense of Ukraine, Europe, and the world can come and fight side by side with the Ukrainians against the Russian war criminals.”

The news of an official foreign unit was met with excitement by members of the Georgia National Legion, an English-speaking force of volunteers with Western military experience who train Ukrainian troops and sometimes deploy to the front line with the country’s marines.

“This is what we have waited for. It’s very good,” Levan Pipia, a legion soldier and Georgian army veteran of the 2008 war with Russia, told BuzzFeed News on Sunday.

UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss was quick to respond to the news, saying she supports British nationals who might go to Ukraine to fight “for democracy,” the BBC reported. She said Ukraine’s struggle was one for freedom, “not just for Ukraine but for the whole of Europe.”

Thousands of foreign fighters have flocked to Ukraine since Russia’s war against the country began in 2014. While most of them have been Russians and citizens of other former Soviet republics, hundreds have come from the European Union, roughly 40 have arrived from the US, and at least 12 from the UK, according to BuzzFeed News’ reporting and independent research done by experts who track such fighters.

The Western foreigners who have come to Ukraine are a motley crew. There are the idealists who believe their own countries aren’t doing enough to help the Ukrainians secure their freedom. There are the tourists who hop from conflict to conflict seeking adventure, war stories, and money. And then there are the extremists who have seen opportunities to link up with far-right paramilitary groups fighting in Ukraine. Of course, some of the foreigners fit into more than one category.

BuzzFeed News met Aiden Aslin, a 27-year-old British citizen who is serving his fourth year in the Ukrainian marines, at the eastern front line in Pavlopil in January. “I just want to support the Ukrainian state, the people, and help them fight for their sovereignty and independence,” he said.

In the weeks since Aslin’s story was published, dozens of men from the US, the UK, and European Union nations have emailed BuzzFeed News about the story and said they were interested in following in his footsteps.

Some in Ukraine’s military see the foreign fighters as filling the void of official Western military boots on the ground in Ukraine. President Joe Biden has repeatedly said that American forces will not be deployed to the country to fight alongside Ukrainians. The US withdrew military trainers from western Ukraine earlier this month.

In a briefing with reporters Sunday, Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba invited foreigners interested in joining the international unit to contact foreign diplomatic missions of Ukraine in their respective countries.

“Now these people have a legal right and legal framework to fight under the chain of command of the armed forces of Ukraine,” he said. “Their access to Ukraine will be facilitated to the maximum extent possible.”

He said that the closure of airports due to Russian missiles presented a logistical challenge and that land crossings from EU countries are now the only way into Ukraine. “But we will help you,” he said.

He added: “Together we defeated Hitler, and we will defeat Putin, too.”

MORE ON THIS

• NATO Won’t Put Troops In Ukraine, But Western Foreigners Are Volunteering To Join The Fight Against RussiaChristopher Miller · Jan. 28, 2022
• Taxi Drivers, Schoolteachers, Bankers: Meet The Ukrainian Guerrilla Army Preparing To Fight RussiaKateryna Malofieieva · Dec. 21, 2021
• Stories Of Ukrainian Heroism Are Giving The Country Hope As It Battles RussiaChristopher Miller · Feb. 27, 2022

• Christopher Miller is a reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in New York

Chicago Tribune

Editorial: Vladimir Putin is a despot. The world must treat him like one.

The Editorial Board, Chicago Tribune – February 25, 2022

There was a time when Vladimir Putin seemed to see himself, not as the head of a re-created Soviet state, but as a czar — an omnipotent monarch ruling over a quiet, subservient, grateful populace. “The monarch doesn’t have to worry about whether or not he will be elected, or about petty political interests, or about how to influence the electorate,” Putin said in “First Person,” a biography published in 2000. “He can think about the destiny of people and not have to be distracted by trivialities.”

When the biographer asked him whether the return of monarchy in Russia was possible, Putin answered: “You know, there’s a lot that seems impossible and incredible, and then — bang!”

Putin may liken himself to a czar, but the rest of the world now knows his true nature is even worse. Actually, the world has suspected Putin’s essence for a long time, but his brutal, bloody invasion of Ukraine has confirmed it. Putin is a despot, a brutish thug in the same ignominious pantheon as Bashar Assad, Robert Mugabe, Saddam Hussein, Idi Amin, Augusto Pinochet and Josef Stalin, the genocidal Soviet dictator whose image Putin has tried to rehabilitate in the eyes of Russians.

It’s time that the rest of the world treats him the way it treats despots. With condemnation, isolation and no quarter.

As of this writing, Russian troops have moved into Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital. Desperate Ukrainians are either fleeing or readying Molotov cocktails and small arms to defend their homeland. Putin’s illegal invasion is proceeding as planned, and while Russian soldiers have encountered stiffer-than-expected resistance, Ukraine’s military forces cannot match Russia’s troop strength and air superiority. Whatever happens, though, Putin is likely to inherit a fierce insurgency that could endure for years.

President Joe Biden has been careful to mete out sanctions against Putin and Russia so that every cudgel in the West’s arsenal isn’t prematurely expended. On Thursday, Biden followed up on an earlier set of modest sanctions with more robust punishment, including imposing harsh penalties on Russia’s two largest banks and shutting down the import of American technology such as semiconductors, lasers and telecommunications equipment, which are vital to Russia’s aerospace, defense and shipping industries. Sanctions against one of the banks, Sberbank, will shut it out of American commerce and bar it from transacting in U.S. dollars. The other bank, VTB, will have all of its assets in American financial institutions frozen.

While those penalties carry heft, the utility of meting out sanctions against Russia may be reaching its end. Sanctions against the bulwark of the Russian economy, the country’s energy sector, should be on the table. So should penalties against Putin himself. No one has yet to unearth where the Russian leader has stashed his billions, but tracking down his ill-gotten troves should be a top priority for the West.

The value of sanctions lies not just in potentially deterring Putin from further aggression in Ukraine. Sanctions also must be harsh enough to inflict lasting damage to Putin, his circle of corrupt billionaires and the Russian economy so that the Kremlin becomes vulnerable to blowback from the Russian masses.

Regime change may one day stare Putin in the face. He wants it in Ukraine, but he may eventually get it at home.

So far, Putin’s self-serving decision to plunge his country into war with Ukraine hasn’t dented his approval ratings among Russians, but that may not last. If sanctions upend the lives of Russians, if the economy slows to a point that the gross domestic product plummets and joblessness soars, Putin may find himself coping with demonstrations too large and angry for his riot squads to quash. It may take time for sanctions to lay such a foundation, but the West must consider the long game in this crisis, alongside the immediacy of Ukraine’s plight.

It’s true that Russians get a skewed view of what happens outside and inside of Russia, via media long ago commandeered by Putin. But Russians know all too well the inhuman indifference Putin is capable of showing to his own people.

When Chechen militants took over a packed theater in Moscow in fall 2002, Putin’s commandos pumped into the building a toxic gas, believed to be a fentanyl derivative, that killed not just the 40 hostage takers, but also 130 hostages. Putin knew children and elderly people were inside — he simply didn’t care. He was just as indifferent about innocents when his forces used tanks, flame throwers and grenade launchers to put down the 2004 Chechen militant takeover of a school in the southern Russian town of Beslan. As many as 334 innocent people died in the siege, 186 of them children. No matter the time or setting, Putin sees human lives the same way he sees pawns on a chessboard — expendable.

Biden’s right when he says Putin chose this war. Putin also chose the role of despot. He has brought the consequence of being a pariah on himself. Now it’s up to the world to ensure that becomes cemented as Putin’s fate. The longtime spy who lavished himself with coronation-like inaugurations may one day find himself a global outcast, and if there’s any justice in the world, throne-less.

Business Insider

Leaked document shows Russia is preparing for ‘a massive medical emergency’ of Ukraine war casualties

Bethany Dawson – February 26, 2022

• Leaked documents sent to ITV News show that Russia is preparing for a major medical event.
• The health ministry is compiling lists of medical professionals for deployment.
• A Ukrainian military official said that this could show that Putin “has the intention to go until the end.”

Leaked documents show that Russia is preparing for many casualties caused by Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and is preparing to draft civilian medics from across the country, said ITV News.

The documents, sent exclusively to ITV news and signed by Deputy Health Minister Plutnitsky, ask medical teams “to be promptly involved in activities aimed at saving lives & preserving the health of people in Russia.”

Emma Burrows, ITV’s news editor, wrote that it “indicates Russia is anticipating a massive medical emergency” and could be forced to deploy doctors and medics from health organizations across the country.

It requests that medical institutions send a list of medical specialists and their details to the Russian health ministry to deploy them when needed. Medics that it is looking for include trauma, heart, maxillofacial and pediatric surgeons, anesthetists, radiologists, nurses (including for operating rooms), and infectious disease specialists.

The document states that these people will be paid by the “Federal Center of Medical Disasters.”

A Ukrainian military official told ITV news that this document shows that the Russians “did not expect to face such a level of resistance and losses” and that they are “far from achieving their goals” of a quick, surprise attack.

They also added that this leaked document could show that Putin intends to “go until the end, despite huge losses of personnel.”

An intelligence update by the UK Ministry of Defence on February 26 stated that “Russian casualties are likely to be heavy and greater than anticipated or acknowledged by the Kremlin.”

According to the official Ukrainian Parliamentary Telegram channel, the Ukrainian military has killed over 3,000 Russian troops and captured 200. Mykhailo Podoliak, an advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is quoted in Ukrainian media saying, “this shows that Ukraine has not just survived, Ukraine is winning!”

Vice News

Lt. Col. Vindman: Trump ‘Absolutely’ at Fault for Russia’s Ukraine Invasion

By Cameron Joseph – February 26, 2022

“It’s because of Trump’s corruption that we have a less capable, less prepared Ukraine,” retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman told VICE News.

The man who played a key role in then-President Donald Trump’s first impeachment says Trump’s attempts to coerce Ukraine for a quid pro quo played a big role in undercutting the country’s ability to fight off a Russian invasion.

Retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman served as the director of European affairs on Trump’s National Security Council, and was on the call when Trump pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to “do us a favor” and dig up dirt on now-President Joe Biden. 

Trump was impeached by the House in late 2019 for demanding that Ukraine investigate Biden while withholding hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of military aid the embattled country needed to defend itself against Russia. The Trump administration eventually released the aid, but not before a lengthy delay that strained the countries’ relations and clearly emboldened Putin.

Vindman was a key witness in that trial.

Trump and his allies vilified Vindman in response, smearing the 20-year Army veteran with accusations of dual loyalty because he was born in Ukraine (and implicitly because he’s Jewish). Vindman was reassigned from that job in early 2020, likely as punishment for speaking out. He’s now suing.

Vindman told VICE News on Friday that Trump’s decision to withhold the badly needed military aid hurt the country’s ability to defend itself—and emboldened Russian President Vladimir Putin. And while Vindman doesn’t let President Biden off the hook, he puts much of the blame for Putin’s invasion squarely on Trump.

“It’s because of Trump’s corruption that we have a less capable, less prepared Ukraine,” Vindman said.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Cameron Joseph: For those of our readers who don’t remember every detail of the first impeachment, can you explain what you heard President Trump ask of President Zelenskyy in July 2019?

Alexander Vindman: I was coordinating a policy of support for Ukraine. It was a new government; the Zelenzskyy government won in a landslide, under a mandate to further integrate with the West. And the entire U.S. government apparatus, recognizing that we had this looming threat of Russia, decided that it was appropriate to invest in the relationship with Ukraine. 

This isn’t out of thin air either. This was as a result of the national security strategy that Donald Trump himself signed in 2017. Operating under that guidance, I had put together a number of plans to support Ukraine.

Really the only person that was at odds was Donald Trump, and his really tight group of minions.

There were strange inquiries coming down on security assistance, this aid that is now proving to be critically important to Ukrainian armed forces defending themselves—and ultimately a hold on security assistance.

And it culminated in this phone call where the president attempted to extort President Zelenskyy. He demanded an investigation into Joe Biden in exchange for support to Ukraine.

Do you think Trump’s efforts at quid pro quo might have emboldened Vladimir Putin? What impact do you think they had?

There’s no question. 

Based on Trump’s temperature toward Ukraine, I think Vladimir Putin believed that in a second Trump term [Putin] could have just waltzed in, NATO potentially would have been destroyed, and Ukraine would have been handed on a silver platter.

But that didn’t turn out. Instead, you had the American public reject Trump and Trumpism at least in sufficient numbers [for President Biden] to win the legal, lawful, proper election. And then the former president attempted to launch a coup and drive hyperpartisanship toward extremism and weaken the United States.

To the people who don’t necessarily follow it, it could seem far-fetched; they might tie these events to Joe Biden. But look at the timing of when this [Russian military] buildup first started. It started in the spring of 2021, just weeks after the [Jan. 6 Capitol] insurrection. Donald Trump didn’t recede into the history books, he didn’t go into quiet retirement. He continued to perpetuate this big lie and sow discord, and Vladimir Putin saw an opportunity in that.

This is 20 years building. But it was a slow creep until you get to the Trump administration, and there’s a big lurch forward. We were almost at a point of no return at that point.

By the time President Biden comes into power, you have all these vulnerabilities and opportunities. From Putin’s perspective, there’s this distracted, enfeebled superpower that’s casting its eyes further afield towards long term competition with China and the price to normalize and stabilize the relationship with Russia was a sphere of influence. 

There are other things that we could have done differently as this ramped up. Now we find ourselves in a different world, in a world that we haven’t actually experienced in decades, in generations.

Do you think Putin would have invaded Ukraine if Trump hadn’t signaled that he didn’t care that much about the country? Would we be here?

Trump is the megaphone, but it’s Tucker Carlson playing on Russian airwaves. It’s Mike Pompeo cheerleading for Putin. It’s these folks that suggest that there’s a division not just within the American public but within the elites. That firm resolve for the traditional Republican Party about staking out a strong position on national security isn’t there. Those are opportunities that these folks presented. 

They have blood on their hands because if they weren’t acting against America’s interests in aiding and abetting our most belligerent aggressive enemy then we may not have ended up here.

I think this is about opportunity, the vulnerability that Donald Trump and his henchmen have offered Vladimir Putin.

Trump delayed military aid for Ukraine as he tried to squeeze Zelenskyy. Do you think that had any impact on Ukraine’s preparedness for an invasion?

Absolutely. 

He arrested what should have been a very, very robust relationship. The entire U.S. government was behind this idea of  a magnified cooperation with Ukraine to help nurture it move forward towards the West. The pillars of that were economic, they were going to be in the energy sector, they were going to be political, to help move them on reforms and anticorruption. They were going to undergird Zelenskyy’s newfound strength to conduct these types of reforms. It was also going to be on security cooperation.

So not only did he arrest all that, but the opportunity cost for the next several years, going all the way through the rest of the Trump administration and kind of a slow ramp up for the Biden administration. We lost that time. 

All that time, Ukraine could have been hardening. It could have been preparing, it could have been making itself unpalatable [for invasion]. It’s because of Trump’s corruption that we have a less capable, less prepared Ukraine.

You emigrated from Ukraine when you were a toddler and have worked professionally with folks in the country since then. Who have you talked to since the invasion began? What have you heard from them?

I don’t really have any family to speak of [left in Ukraine]. My family all emigrated; we came as refugees. We had the rest of our family come over in subsequent decades. But I do have friends and colleagues that are over there.

I haven’t spoken to many since the war started. It’s only been 36 hours, it feels like it’s been much longer than that. But it’s really quite disturbing. People are very fearful.

I’ve talked to people here that have family members there who are panicked, trying to figure out what to do, how to protect their family.

Do you think that Russia would have invaded Ukraine if Trump had taken a firmer line toward Russia and been more supportive of Ukraine?

Trump had a deep animosity toward Ukraine. We all know now about the conspiracy theories about the CrowdStrike servers, CrowdStrike being a Ukrainian enterprise, Hillary Clinton’s emails and the criticism he received for his inane commentary on Ukraine when he was a candidate, and of course Paul Manafort being tripped up. The idea that he was going to be supportive of Ukraine just seems far-fetched to me.

Put another way, if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016, do you think Putin would be in Ukraine right now?

That is a hard thing to say. Maybe not. 

We’ve lurched toward confrontation because we weren’t pushing back on Russian aggression. We lurched under Trump. Without that lurch, we would still have maybe that opportunity to avert this catastrophe. And it’s not a catastrophe simply for Ukraine; it’s a catastrophe for our Euro-Atlantic alliance and for a rules-based order.

Putin was certainly concerned about Hillary Clinton taking a firmer line with him. Maybe it didn’t have to happen in 2022, but there was eventually going to be a reckoning unless we recognized Russia as belligerent and started to impose costs for its aggression.

Do you think Putin stops at Ukraine? Are you concerned he might turn his attention to the Baltic states or other NATO allies? How do you see this playing out?

There have been other conflicts, but we haven’t had this kind of massive military offensive in Europe, which is the bedrock, the core of our vital interests. It’s the combined power of the U.S. and NATO together that really keep the world on some sort of peaceful trajectory. President Putin’s own rhetoric suggests his wandering eyes will look toward Moldova and Georgia and Finland.

I think NATO allies are a high bar. Their collective defense architecture will hold firm.

What do you think could draw in American or NATO boots on the ground in actual combat?

One of the things that concerns me is the scale of this. We’re seeing just the first 36 hours. We have to remember our involvement in the Balkans [in the 1990s] was very reluctant. And it was the human catastrophe that unfolded that ultimately drew us in. So there might be a clamor from that standpoint. I think it’s unlikely, but there could be an accident or miscalculation that could draw us in. It could be a cyberattack with spillage over Ukraine’s borders into Europe and the U.S. that could draw us in. 

There are different potential scenarios that are dangerous here. That’s why we should have done more.

What do you want to see the U.S. do to continue to support Ukraine militarily going forward, and do you expect that this will happen?

It’s military, informational, it’s diplomatic, and it’s economic. It’s a full-court press to isolate Russia, a full-court press to build consensus around the alliance and around our partners that feel that Russia’s actions have crossed a line. It’s a full-court press on China, frankly, to play a constructive role here as a rising superpower.

Open the spigot from the extremely wealthy West. Why are we talking about relatively paltry sums of a billion dollars? Open up the spigot, talk about rebuilding Ukraine.

On the military side, there’s more to be said there. Right now it’s particularly dangerous. There are a lot of things we could have done two days ago, maybe even with boots on the ground in a humanitarian role, that we can’t do now.

There should be a new partnership formed between NATO and Ukraine built around the notion of supporting them through this existential crisis for them. We should do something like lend-lease, basically provisioning them like we did with Russia, the Soviet Union against the Nazis, with whatever they need in order to conduct this war and defend themselves.

That doesn’t violate the rules of the road we operated under during the Cold War. We never went to blows directly with the Soviet Union, but there are multiple instances of Russia supporting our adversaries or us supporting their adversaries. Afghanistan, Korea, Vietnam are just the ones that rise to mind. The rules of the road were no direct confrontation, but indirectly supporting proxies was totally within bounds.

Once Biden was in office, what if anything could he have done to avoid this? I know you’ve been critical of how he handled this.

Yes, he could have avoided it. 

They took certain things off the table. There were certain policy options they didn’t consider due to a misplaced sense of danger. Putin is masterful at preying on hopes and fears. And the saber-rattling about a bilateral confrontation is misplaced. It is a mirage. The Russians do not want a war with us. They don’t want a nuclear war. They don’t want a conventional war.

We’ve lost our nerve to a certain extent. We were practiced at not blinking at Soviet provocations in the Cold War. And we’ve forgotten. We’re facing an adversary that lives in that world, grew up in that world, uses the tools of that world, and we’re not prepared.

What scares you most going forward?

The possibility of a confrontation with Russia now is negligible. But the probability of us having a significant confrontation down the road is higher unless we hold our ground here.

New York Post

Heroic Ukrainian soldier blows himself up on bridge to prevent Russian advance

By Yaron Steinbuch – February 25, 2022 

A Ukrainian soldier has been hailed as a hero for blowing himself up to destroy a bridge in an effort to stop Russian tanks from invading his country.

Marine battalion engineer Vitaly Skakun Volodymyrovych was deployed to the Henichesk bridge in the southern province of Kherson when the Russian tanks advanced, the Ukrainian military said on its Facebook page.

“On this difficult day for our country, when the Ukrainian people give way to the Russian occupiers in all directions, one of the hardest places on the map of Ukraine was the Crimean intersection, where one of the first enemies met a separate marine battalion,” according to the post.

When the battalion decided that the only way to block the armored column was by blowing up the bridge, Volodymyrovych volunteered to place mines on the span, the General Staff of the Armed Forces said.

And when he realized he had no time to get to safety, the brave soldier made the ultimate sacrifice on the bridge, which connected Russian-occupied Crimea and mainland Ukraine.

“According to his brothers in arms, Vitaly got in touch [with them] and said he was going to blow up the bridge. Immediately after an explosion rang out,” the military said.

“Our brother was killed. His heroic act significantly slowed down the push of the enemy, allowing the unit to relocate and organize the defense,” the statement said.

“Russian invaders, know, under your feet the earth will burn! We will fight as long as we live! And as long as we are alive we will fight!” it added.

Military commanders said they planned to give Volodymyrovych a posthumous award for his “heroic act.”  

As a result of his act of valor, the Russian forces were forced to take a longer route into the region, the US Sun reported.

More than 130 Ukrainian soldiers were killed on the first day of fighting after Russian forces stormed into the country, according to the outlet.

Reuters

At the Ukrainian border, a mother brings a stranger’s children to safety

Anita Komuves – February 26, 2022

BEREGSURANY, Hungary (Reuters) – Clutching a mobile phone number of a woman she had never met, Nataliya Ableyeva crossed the border from Ukraine into Hungary on Saturday, entrusted with a precious cargo.

A stranger’s children.

Waiting at the border crossing on the Ukrainian side, Ableyeva had met a desperate 38-year-old man from her home town of Kamianets-Podilskyi, with his young son and daughter.

The border guards would not let him pass. Ukraine has banned all Ukrainian men between the ages of 18 and 60 from leaving, so they can fight for their country.

“Their father simply handed over the two kids to me, and trusted me, giving me their passports to bring them over,” 58-year-old Ableyeva said, the arms of the young boy she had known for just a few hours around her neck.

The children’s Ukrainian mother was on her way from Italy to meet them and take them to safety, the father said. He gave Ableyeva the mother’s mobile number, and said goodbye to his children, wrapped up against the cold in thick jackets and hats.

Ableyeva had left her own two grown-up children behind in Ukraine. One a policeman, the other a nurse, neither could leave Ukraine under the mobilisation decree.

She took the two small children by the hand and together they crossed the border.

On the Hungarian side at Beregsurany, they waited, sitting on a bench near a tent set up for the steady flow of refugees streaming over the frontier. The little boy was crying when his mobile phone rang.

It was his mother, she was nearly at the border post.

When 33-year-old Anna Semyuk arrived, her blonde hair scraped back in a pony tail, she hugged her son and went to her daughter, lying exhausted in the back of a car and wrapped in a pink blanket.

Then she thanked Ableyeva. Standing in the cold on the scrubby ground, two women embraced for several minutes and started to cry.

“All I can say to my kids now, is that everything will be alright,” said Semyuk. “In one or two weeks, and we will go home.”

(Reporting by Anita Komuves, writing by Krisztina Than, editing by Ros Russell)

Axios

Germany to send thousands of weapons to Ukraine in major reversal

Zachary Basu – February 26, 2022

Germany will send 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 Stinger missiles to Ukraine, marking a complete reversal in Berlin’s restrictive arms export policy, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced Saturday.

Why it matters: Germany has for months come under intense criticism for its response to Russia’s aggression toward Ukraine. The government said its “historical responsibilities” prevented it from shipping arms to conflict zones, and had previously blocked other NATO allies from transferring German-origin weapons to Ukraine.

Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with Axios Markets. 

What they’re saying: “The Russian attack marks a turning point. It is our duty to do our best to help Ukraine defend against the invading army of Putin. That’s why we’re supplying 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 stinger missiles to our friends in the Ukraine,” Scholz tweeted.

• Germany will also lift its ban on other countries exporting German-origin weapons, allowing the Netherlands to transfer 400 rocket-propelled grenade launchers to Ukraine.

The big picture: Germany is the largest economy and most powerful country in the European Union, making its voice and policy positions critical to the effectiveness of the West’s response to Russia’s invasion.

• Germany is highly reliant on Russian natural gas and had been an obstacle in discussions about imposing the harshest sanctions on Moscow, fearing the economic and energy reverberations.
• Massive public pressure, including from Ukrainian officials, appears to have led Germany to drop its opposition to a number of the toughest measures, including halting the certification of the Russia-to-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

What to watch: The EU is working toward an agreement to disconnect Russia from the SWIFT financial system, a major step that Germany had previously opposed along with Italy and Hungary.

Go deeper: Ukraine-Russia crisis dashboard