Diplomacy 101 should be a required course for a government that seems to fail at it. Too many sycophantic bureaucrats and technicians unable to think for themselves and speak with an educated, independent, objective voice seem to run the state department and dominate D.C. The present maladroit American vector in opposition to reason and history is an educational experience for observers that have read Being and Nothingness, The Critique of Dialectical Reason and Toynbee and Treadgold’s works on history exemplifying theory as fact. State and N.A.T.O have a colonialist view of Ukraine and Russia and narrate use-truths that define their own social reality. Russians probably want to repossess the Ukraine- the borderlands, regarding it as something like a stolen truck.
U.S. diplomacy concerning potential or actual belligerents isn’t too subtle; it means give up or we will sanction and conflict you and yours until we bury you. It would be a preferred alternative to have creative means of transcending paradigms that draw American interests to use their diplomats and politicians like puppets and mouthpieces in support of plutocratic policy. Like Hitler, President Clinton and the Brits thought they could ‘jack the Ukraine from Russia in 1994 and nothing meaningful would follow except profits. They couldn’t have been more wrong. President Ronald Reagan was the only one in his administration that wanted completely bilateral nuclear disarmament.
When most of the west were mired in a Cold War mentality President Reagan shepherded the west and worked with Soviet Union leadership toward ending the conflict for good, and communists sought Reagan’s free enterprise and democracy. Reagan understood real politik; Democrats today are a media kool-aid drinking crew of one party-rule (themselves) with hate for all opposition. When time moved on and with Reagan long gone evil lawyers frumped the dark side of the force exploited the nascent Russian Federation like carpet baggers looting nations.
In the United States the rise of the black internal proletariat generated a worldview in opposition to the historical majority monomaniacally taken up by the Democrat Party and is used to view the world. In the proletariat’s view there are allies and foes of just demands of proletarians. Race is used as a metric for legislation rather than economics and classes impartial of race. The dwindling white middle class majority that had kept concentrated wealth in check with progressive taxes for a generation became targets of downsizing b y Democrats and Wall Street that had policies in support of borderless globalization and cheap labor. White middle class conservative anti-disestablishmentarianism was thought of as fascist. Not all white American males were of the same political opinions though; the civil war for example scythed the best whites of north as well as south.
Democrats have joined with Wall Street to synthesize a point of view enabling capitalist colonization of the globe, importation of cheap labor and eliminating all resistance to Wall Street’s concentration of wealth and partly shared values of the internal proletariat such as homosexual ‘marriage’. Russia is regarded as resisting British, butch and foreign political power.
Russian plainly wants the Ukraine returned. I admonished the Democratic party not to elect Bill Clinton or Tom Harkins in the 1992 primaries yet they did, against good reason. Harkins and Clinton were too much the anglophiles investing in British territories and/or education. MI-5 may have made videos of Bill Clinton as an Oxford Rhodes scholar getting serviced by British girls or smoking dope or using cocaine and would have had him effectively by the balls for his future (vis. Bill Clinton-Jeffrey Epstein-Brit royal axis of evil). I doubt that Mr. Clinton just started getting serviced by women transported by state troopers to hotel rooms as Arkansas governor.
Did the lawyer-President Bill Clinton abuse his power to get service from Monica Lewinsky the student-intern? Did the nuclear N.A.T.O. ready-for-war at military peak efficiency leader President Bill Clinton abuse his power over Boris Yeltsin- leader of a vulnerable, weak Russian Federation in disarray transitioning from communism? Democrat Party leaders are a bunch of lawyers believing they are pursuing litigation against Russia with a winning hand; as if they were Aleph Beth Corporation (just a fiction example to illustrate the point) lawyers levering a poor negro to give up his home and modest inheritance because of legal threats and asymmetric power disadvantage. Democrat lawyers are instead trying to defend and honor a (approximately.) thirty year old political mugging by President Clinton and the Brits.
President Clinton advanced British imperial interests (as Rhodes scholars are purposed to do) by taking advantaged of the weakened state of Russia in 1994 to get President Yeltsin to sign an agreement with Britain and the U.S. to relinquish Ukraine. That was comparable to the agreement Vladimir Lenin signed with Foreign Minister Molotov to relinquish Ukraine to end the war between Germany and Russia. Each submission would engender lasting and avoidable political harm to those that made the agreements. The First World War armistice laid heavy burdens, reparations and land grabs on the Germans and helped foment the Second World War (though by no means the sole cause), Since then the U.S. has learned to give generous terms to powers it has defeated in war in order to make allies of them so far as possible.
England has been at odds with Russia since the Tsar rebuffed and deported the Chancellor expedition about a half millennia ago that was the first English mission to Russia. England has been too happy to be the master with the U.S. blaster in its relationship with Russia when ignorant and compliant U.S. anglophiles have kissed British political asses instead of thinking for themselves of U.S. national interests. The Brits are not all bad, yet they have an imperial spirit at heart of minion-subjects under rich authority and one need be mindful of that. Brits may leap into avoidable conflicts for potential profits knowing the U.S. will bear the lion’s share of the costs.
Russia needs Dnepr river frontage and Ukrainian real estate for historical, economic and security reasons. Western Ukraine tends to want independence, and bringing those interests together is the realistic and necessary solution to the troubles. Diplomacy that has those to goals might give Eastern Ukraine to Russia and allow West Ukraine to join N.A.T.O. Even Russia might be able to live with that.
Stabilizing the Ukraine region and its century of problems concerning western tries to annex it should be done intelligently rather than stupidly and forcefully as U.S. leadership desires. Getting Russia to align with the west in most trade and security matters might be a positive influence on China and its global ambitions to divide the world toward socialist-corporatism-authoritarianism and pure corporatism. The west faces the challenge of taxing plutocrats enough to keep democracy alive and China has continuing demographic challenges that seem to require socialism and Neo-authoritarianism to de frappe.
Capitalism in a socially totalized world with no free, wild lands or way for individuals to live outside the social economy requires regulation of wealth and diminishing ecosphere health to keep democracy/republics well functioning. Otherwise democracy becomes nothing more than tokenism as a mask covering plutocracy with greed and power dominating socially and environmentally albeit usually hidden behind the media they own. The U.S. has slid so far into the plutocratic swamp that written social media opinions of dissent are labeled trink- treasonous ink (trink isn’t a reference to the German word meaning drink). Dissent is discouraged in corporatism.
With Europe, Russia, the U.S.A. and India all on the same sheet of Eco-economic and defense sheet of music Chinese aggression toward what properly should be an independent Taiwan should be easier to contain. China should find greater advantages in working with the west and Asia than being an opponent. Dangers presented by planetary plutocrats are challenges to east and west, China and the United States. Russia and Ukraine are simply chips in the global poker game big Wall Street investors play.
