Letter to the Editor of “The Hill”

Dear Editor,

In his 04/15/24 article “What Ukraine has given to America,” David Super talks about how “Ukraine provides priceless insight into the strengths and weaknesses of U.S. weapons and military doctrines” and an even bigger gift of weakening Russia “without jeopardizing our servicemembers’ lives.”

This is in line with what Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and many of his colleagues in Congress on both sides of the aisle, as well as journalists like Lee Hockstader say that the billions we are investing in Ukraine are a “bargain” when compared with the results we got.  Apparently, for all of them, Ukrainians are cheap cannon fodder, and hundreds of thousands of their lives lost are just insignificant collateral damage. 

However, many well-known experts from the US military, intelligence, and university professors circles believe and prove with facts that the war in Ukraine is a Western fault and indicate that the roots of this crisis lie in the February 2014 regime change Western-backed “Maidan” coup that changed Kyiv’s regime from neutral to a pro-NATO stand. 

Some believe that it started earlier in 2008 with GW Bush’s push to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO or even in 1998 when Bill Clinton began the first round of the post-Cold War NATO expansion, thus violating a Western pledge to Soviet President Michail Gorbachev, not to move NATO one inch East. This was a “fateful foreign policy error,” in the opinion of one of the most distinguished US diplomats, George Kennan.    

Their voices and warnings have been largely ignored by those who want to continue this war instead of calling for its ending through diplomacy.  They ignore even Pope Francis, who, in his conversation with reporters from Il Corriere della Sera, said that “NATO’s barking at Russia’s doors” may have raised alarms in the Kremlin about the Western alliance’s intentions in Ukraine.

Despite angry comments from the mainstream media, Pope doubled down, saying Ukraine should have the “courage of the white flag” and negotiate an end to the war with Russia: “When you see that you are defeated, that things are not going well, it is necessary to have the courage to negotiate…don’t be ashamed to negotiate before things get worse.” 

This war would never have happened, and Ukraine would still be within its 1991 borders, including Crimea, if outside forces, first of all in Washington, would accept its neutral status.   

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, many Ukrainians, including members of the parliament Rada, had a different agenda, which can be summarized as follows: free from the communist yoke, with vital industrial and agricultural sectors, a favorable climate, and fertile land, Ukraine had great potential to become one of the most prosperous European countries. Effective anti-corruption reforms, a certain level of autonomy for regions with large Russian ethnic populations, and a neutral status without membership in any military blocs would make Ukraine a happy and prosperous state.

Instead, billions of U.S. tax dollars were invested in Ukraine not to stimulate its economy but to reshape public opinion, predominantly pro-neutral and anti-NATO membership.  Those responsible for this policy and their backers are, in the words of former Senator Sam Nunn and many others, who see a clear picture of what is happening, are causing our “sleepwalking towards a nuclear precipice.”