Ukraine is ground zero for the expansion of the U.S.-Russia proxy war, (and the war industry is jubilant)
This six-week war surely has left the war industry jubilant. In Washington, Biden recently proposed what would be the largest U.S. “defense” budget in history, more than $813 billion.
The U.S. Has Its Own Agenda Against Russia Ukraine is ground zero for the expansion of the U.S.-Russia proxy war. The Intercept, Jeremy Scahill, April 2 2022 Ever since Vladimir Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine, there has been an unprecedented cohesion of messaging emanating from the U.S. government, its NATO and other European allies, and large segments of the Western media establishment. As massive quantities of weapons pour into Ukraine, there has been consistent media and political agitation for President Joe Biden and other Western leaders to “do more” or answer for why they are not further escalating the situation, including through the imposition of a no-fly zone.
The White House smells Putin’s blood in the waters of his disastrous invasion. The flow of weapons, the sweeping sanctions, and other acts of economic warfare are ultimately aimed not just at defending Ukraine and making the regime pay for the invasion in the immediate present, but also setting in motion its downfall. “For god’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” Biden said during his recent visit to Poland. The White House sought to walk back the line and clarify that it did not constitute a change in policy but was merely an expression of the president’s righteous anger. The kerfuffle over what Biden really meant is less important than the very public actions of the U.S. and its allies.
It should not be assumed that the strategies and actions being employed by Washington and its allies in their proxy war against Moscow will always be in the best interest of Ukraine or its people. Likewise, Ukraine’s calls for military support and action from the West — however justifiable and sincere they are — may not be in the best interest of the rest of the world, particularly if they increase the likelihood of nuclear war or World War III. The desire to avoid this scenario by advocating for a negotiated solution to the war that addresses Russia’s stated concerns or its rationale for the invasion is not a capitulation to Putin and it is not appeasement. It is common sense.
While the fate of Ukraine and the lives of its civilian population are evoked in calls for more escalatory action from the West, it is these very people who will suffer and die in large numbers every day the war drags on. Western media coverage is often crafted to portray only one outcome as acceptable: a decisive Ukrainian victory, in which the government of Volodymyr Zelenskyy emerges from the horrors of the Russian invasion in complete control of all of its territory, including Crimea and the Donbas region. Ukraine, as a free and independent state, should be free to join NATO, and Russia has no legitimacy in questioning the implications of such a move. Advocacy for accepting anything short of this outcome is a victory for Russia and therefore traitorous to even consider………………
The routine belligerence exhibited by countless politicians, pundits, and media figures about taking the fight to Putin in Ukraine is largely chickenhawkery. …………
when you listen to the fine details of Ukraine’s own negotiators and leaders, it’s clear that they understand that the war does not end with the swift annihilation of Putin, the downfall of Russia, or with a clean and complete Ukrainian retention of its territorial sovereignty. That’s why Zelenskyy’s government has acknowledged that the issue of NATO membership, a formalized neutrality status, and an internationally brokered process on the status of Crimea will all be on the table.
There has been much noise about Russia’s recent indications that it was drawing down its military actions in parts of Ukraine, particularly around the capital Kyiv. The U.S. and NATO have acknowledged a partial drawdown but asserted that Russian forces appear to be repositioning, likely for use in the east. Russia has also said as much itself. Moscow’s position is that “the main goals of the first stage of the operation have generally been accomplished.”
There is a peculiar dynamic surrounding the analysis of Putin’s comments on his intentions for Ukraine. He is accused of lying when his remarks undermine the U.S. narrative, but we are told to believe he is absolutely telling the truth when his pugnacious threats bolster the U.S. position.
Whether or not Putin intended to seize all of Ukraine and become an imperial occupier, he did seem to believe his invasion could cause the Ukrainian government to collapse and its leaders to flee in fear. That did not happen. Instead, U.S. and NATO-armed Ukrainian forces outside Kyiv have fought the Russian troops ferociously and inflicted significant losses against them on the battlefield. At the same time, by opening multiple fronts, Moscow forced Ukraine to defend vital territory, including its capital. This strategy exacted a tremendous human toll on the Russian military, but it did take some heat off Russian forces in the Donbas territories in the east, which Putin has cited as his territorial priority in the operation.
But the question of Putin’s original intent — to take Kyiv or to use that threat as a strategy to spread Ukraine’s defenses thin — is now largely irrelevant except in the rhetorical battlespace focused on Russian weakness, incompetence, or failure.
The most contentious issue in the negotiations to end the war will likely have little to do with NATO membership. Zelenskyy has already conceded that to end the war Ukraine will have to drop that ambition and adopt a neutral and nonaligned status, though he does want to continue the pursuit of joining the European Union. Russia will certainly oppose any attempts for Kyiv to win a backdoor “Article 5” status that could trigger defense of Ukraine by Western powers in cases of future military actions by Moscow. Ukraine has suggested that it would also want China and Turkey to be a part of such a guarantee, not just adversaries of Russia. There are indications that the U.S. doesn’t think the proposal is viable, and Britain’s deputy prime minister bluntly stated, “Ukraine is not a NATO member,” adding, “We’re not going to engage Russia in direct military confrontation.”
Based on the reports out of the recent negotiations in Turkey, it seems that the most incendiary questions will revolve around the breakaway republics in the Donbas region. Ukraine has effectively said it wants a return to the pre-invasion status quo, which would mean erasing the Putin-recognized declarations of independence from Donetsk and Luhansk. Russia, which is currently expanding its control over the Donbas and seizing more territory, is unlikely to agree. This dynamic more than any other could delay or block any meaningful resolution and would be a central focus in a potential summit between Zelenskyy and Putin.
Once there is a brokered agreement, the flow of Western weapons into Ukraine and Russian military support for the separatists will result in a constant state of war footing for many years to come. A cloud portending more fighting and bloodshed will remain hovering over eastern Ukraine. If U.S. and other NATO troops resume their training exercises in Ukraine, as Biden has indicated they should, this means that there will always be a risk of incidents that could quickly escalate.
This six-week war surely has left the war industry jubilant. In Washington, Biden recently proposed what would be the largest U.S. “defense” budget in history, more than $813 billion. Germany and other European countries are publicly committing to buying and selling more weapons and spending more on defense. NATO is raising the prospect of expanding its permanent military presence in Europe and Washington is reasserting its political dominance over Europe on security matters.
But despite the image of global unity of cause being promoted by the U.S. and its NATO allies, several large and powerful nations, including China, India, Indonesia, and NATO member Turkey, are not marching to Washington’s drumbeat — not in the proxy-war business and not in the policy of sanctioning and vilifying Russia.
The overt war in Ukraine will have to end at the negotiating table. But the proxy war is escalating and will have consequences that extend far beyond the current battlefield. https://theintercept.com/2022/04/01/russia-ukraine-proxy-war-washington-diplomacy/
Ending Ukraine’s suffering. The decision to negotiate this is up to Ukraine, not USA
 |
Putin, The Nuclear Threat, And Ending The War: To Squeeze Or Not To Squeeze? Michael Krepon, Forbes, 4 Apr 22,
To squeeze or not to squeeze. That is the question that tries analytically minded souls…………..
………..The majority view among the punditocracy counsels a negotiated settlement. One concern is that if Putin feels cornered, he could do something everyone will regret — like using a nuclear detonation in war. Even if he doesn’t, the longer this war lasts, the more Ukrainian city blocks will be reduced to rubble.
………….most analysts argue that we ought to give Putin a face-saving exit, which means conceding Ukrainian territory to Russia. How much territory to concede would be a hard issue in any negotiated settlement.
………. the deciding vote on the question of to squeeze or not to squeeze belongs to the government and people of Ukraine. It’s their land, their casualty counts, and their cities. NATO is obliged to take its cues from Volodymyr Zelensky. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkrepon/2022/04/04/putin-the-nuclear-threat-and-ending-the-war-to-squeeze-or-not-to-squeeze/?sh=51ec25776109
“No prohibitions”: Renewables funds can be spent on fossil hydrogen and CCS, officials say — perhaps even nuclear.
Angus Taylor’s latest intervention creates mass confusion, with officials insisting renewables funding could be redirected to fossil fuels and nuclear. The post “No prohibitions”: Renewables funds can be spent on fossil hydrogen and CCS, officials say appeared first on RenewEconomy.
“No prohibitions”: Renewables funds can be spent on fossil hydrogen and CCS, officials say — RenewEconomy
Billions in government grants set aside to support the development of renewable energy technologies could be redirected to fossil hydrogen production, carbon capture and storage projects and possibly nuclear energy under new regulations issued by federal energy minister Angus Taylor.
Officials from the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources (DISER) told a senate estimates hearing on Monday that there would be “no prohibitions” on which technologies the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) may fund under the new regulations
But in the process of issuing the regulations, it appears Taylor has created a regulatory omnishambles, with officials providing senate estimates contradictory information regarding which technologies the renewables agency may be able to fund………………………………
An explanatory statement included with the latest set of regulations stated that the Morrison government intends to ensure ARENA could fund non-renewable energy technologies.
“The Regulations provides ARENA with the necessary authority to deliver any non-renewable elements of the programs, supporting emissions reductions through broader clean energy technologies such as energy efficiency and non‑renewable low-emission technologies,” the explanatory statement said.
The Clean Energy Finance Corporation is, however, explicitly prohibited from investing in nuclear projects and carbon capture and storage projects under its legislation.
Representatives from the CEFC told the senate estimates hearing on Monday that it would not be possible for the green bank’s board to include carbon capture and storage projects within its definition of “low emissions technology”, due to the explicit prohibition contained within the CEFC’s legislation.
But, confusingly, officials from both the industry department and ARENA insisted that the prohibitions imposed on the CEFC would not apply to ARENA………. https://reneweconomy.com.au/no-prohibitions-renewables-agency-funds-opened-up-for-fossil-hydrogen-ccs-possibly-nuclear/
Why transmission is the missing link to an orderly transition to renewables — RenewEconomy
Transmission projects take a long time to develop, but we don’t have a lot of time if we are serious about a timely transition to cleaner sources of electricity. The post Why transmission is the missing link to an orderly transition to renewables appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Why transmission is the missing link to an orderly transition to renewables — RenewEconomy
“Dangerous radicals:” UN takes aim at Australia over fossil fuels and climate lies — RenewEconomy
IPCC says Australia victim of one of the most successful fossil fuel lobbying efforts, as UN chief slams leaders for lying about climate action. The post “Dangerous radicals:” UN takes aim at Australia over fossil fuels and climate lies appeared first on RenewEconomy.
“Dangerous radicals:” UN takes aim at Australia over fossil fuels and climate lies — RenewEconomy
New data shows big jump in toxic coal plant pollution, even as output falls — RenewEconomy
Analysis shows big increase in amount of toxic air pollutants emitted by Australia’s ageing fleet of coal-fired power plants, even while generation output of some has decreased. The post New data shows big jump in toxic coal plant pollution, even as output falls appeared first on RenewEconomy.
New data shows big jump in toxic coal plant pollution, even as output falls — RenewEconomy
It’s astounding Australia has no policy framework to drive urgent clean energy transition — RenewEconomy
It is astounding that there is no nationally agreed policy-making framework to guide Australia through a once in a century technological transition. The post It’s astounding Australia has no policy framework to drive urgent clean energy transition appeared first on RenewEconomy.
It’s astounding Australia has no policy framework to drive urgent clean energy transition — RenewEconomy
Japanese renewable investor lands financing deal for small Victoria solar farm — RenewEconomy
Japanese based renewable energy developer reaches financial close for a small solar farm in Victoria after landing a deal with a local superannuation fund. The post Japanese renewable investor lands financing deal for small Victoria solar farm appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Japanese renewable investor lands financing deal for small Victoria solar farm — RenewEconomy
April 4 Energy News — geoharvey
Opinion: ¶ “Tesla And German Auto Industry’s Varied Tech Paths” • Tesla manages its business very differently than its competitors. As a result, Tesla sales grew almost 90% in 2021, compared to a declines of 2% at Daimler and 3% at the VW Group. Tesla’s growth took place despite a world-wide shortage in chips, and […]
April 4 Energy News — geoharvey
Tasmania’s first solar project to fuel green hydrogen plant to replace diesel use — RenewEconomy
Line Hydrogen to build green hydrogen production facility in Tasmania, getting power from the state’s first solar farm. The post Tasmania’s first solar project to fuel green hydrogen plant to replace diesel use appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Tasmania’s first solar project to fuel green hydrogen plant to replace diesel use — RenewEconomy
Wind and solar make deep cuts in emissions possible, but fossil fuels must go: IPCC — RenewEconomy
Wind, solar and battery storage will play centre-stage to cut emissions in half by 2030, the IPCC says, while more expensive CCS will have only a bit part. The post Wind and solar make deep cuts in emissions possible, but fossil fuels must go: IPCC appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Wind and solar make deep cuts in emissions possible, but fossil fuels must go: IPCC — RenewEconomy
“Now or never:” IPCC says immediate and deep cuts needed for liveable future — RenewEconomy
IPCC uses dramatic language to insist world must make “immediate and deep” emissions cuts, to try and ensure a liveable planet. The post “Now or never:” IPCC says immediate and deep cuts needed for liveable future appeared first on RenewEconomy.
“Now or never:” IPCC says immediate and deep cuts needed for liveable future — RenewEconomy
Gas-led recovery is a “dog”, world must stop burning fossil fuels, Turnbull says — RenewEconomy
Malcolm Turnbull says the Coalition’s gas led recovery is a “dog”, and says the world must stop burning fossil fuels and put gas “out of business.” The post Gas-led recovery is a “dog”, world must stop burning fossil fuels, Turnbull says appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Gas-led recovery is a “dog”, world must stop burning fossil fuels, Turnbull says — RenewEconomy
Pundits Who Advocate Hot War With Russia Are Enemies Of Humanity
Caitlin Johnstone 5 Apr 22,
In an appearance on the MSNBC show Velshi, The Modern War Institute’s John Spencer explicitly advocated direct US military conflict with Russia due to allegations of war crimes in the Ukrainian city of Bucha.
“I’m ready to commit at this moment — unlike I was before this day — to put people in direct contact with Russia, to stop Russia,” Spencer said. “Call it peacekeeping. Call it what you will. We have to do more than provide weapons. And by ‘we,’ I mean the United States. Yes, we’ll do it as a coalition with lots of other people, but we are the example. So put boots on the ground, send weapons directly at Russia.”
Notice the bizarre verbal gymnastics being used by Spencer to obfuscate the fact that he is advocating a hot war with a nuclear superpower: “put people in direct contact with Russia,” “send weapons directly at Russia”. Who talks like that? He’s calling for the US military to fire upon the Russian military, he’s just saying it really weird.
To be clear this isn’t just some arms industry-funded think tanker saying this; The Modern War Institute is part of the Department of Military Instruction for the United States Military Academy, which is operated directly by the Pentagon.
Asked by the show’s host Ali Velshi what he thought of warnings that direct military confrontation with Russia could lead to nuclear war, Spencer said, “It is a huge risk, I understand that. But today is different.
Velshi himself was much more to the point than his guest, both online and on social media……………………
“The turning point for the west and NATO will come when the sun rises over Kyiv on Sunday, and the war crimes against civilian non-combatants becomes visible to all,” Velshi said on Twitter over the weekend. “There is no more time for prevarication. If ‘never again’ means anything, then this is the time to act.”
Asked what specifically he meant by this, Velshi clarified that he was advocating “Direct military involvement.”………………………
he argued that going to war with Russia for Ukraine would not necessarily lead to nuclear war, claiming that “A no fly zone is not so different from the endless supply of weaponry the west is sending in to Ukraine.”
These are not sane or acceptable things for mainstream pundits to be telling people. Directly attacking the Russian military would indeed risk unleashing a chain of rapid escalations that could easily lead to full-scale nuclear war; there would be far too many small, moving parts for this to be anywhere remotely close to predictable or controllable. A no-fly zone over Ukraine would immediately put NATO powers in direct hot war with Russia, which is in fact completely different from shipping weapons to Ukrainian forces.
The fact that a nuclear superpower cannot be regarded in the same way as a nation without nukes has been basic, common sense orthodoxy for all major powers since Stalin got the bomb. This is not some kind of advanced esoteric understanding that you can only grasp if you’ve been studying this stuff for years; as far as I know children are still learning about the history of nuclear weapons and Mutually Assured Destruction in grade school. This isn’t something you should have to explain to grown adults, much less influential mainstream news media pundits.
But it’s becoming more and more common. The line that we’re already in World War 3 and need to begin acting accordingly is showing up more and more often. The idea that NATO powers might be able to get away with attacking the Russian military in Ukraine without sparking a nuclear exchange is fast becoming its own genre of western foreign policy punditry, and that trend looks to accelerate with the latest (arguably pretty dubious) claims of Russian atrocities in this war…………………………………
There’s also the galling White House press conferences in which ambitious reporters aggressively demand to know why the Biden administration isn’t doing more to escalate against Russia, as clear an illustration as you could ask for of the fact that the mainstream press are only allowed to be pushy and confrontational with US government officials when they’re demanding more bloodshed.
As we’ve discussed previously, even if these increasingly loud calls for hot war between nuclear superpowers don’t immediately succeed, what they do is push the Overton window of mainstream discourse all the way over toward the most warmongering extreme possible so that calls for more escalation seem moderate and calls for de-escalation look like extremist apologia for Vladimir Putin. In the very best-case scenario they leave people far more open to consenting to far more nuclear brinkmanship than any thinking person should ever consent to.
This is not okay. It is not okay for them to do this to us. It is not okay for them to normalize the idea of escalations that could easily end humankind. That is the most insane position that any person could possibly take. More insane than Nazism, or any other extremist ideology you could think of. Supporting actions that may lead to human extinction makes these people enemies of our entire species…………. https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/pundits-who-advocate-hot-war-with?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoyNTU2MjE3LCJwb3N0X2lkIjo1MTU3MjA2MywiXyI6IllKbC9qIiwiaWF0IjoxNjQ5MTA1NDE2LCJleHAiOjE2NDkxMDkwMTYsImlzcyI6InB1Yi04MjEyNCIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24ifQ.bmuRTEDt-AbWExPCsWYbp8vbEPSNoa6Jc3OVyw-4qL4&s=r
Wittenoom is officially closed, but can it be cleaned up?
Wittenoom is officially closed, but can it be cleaned up?
Cleaning up the former asbestos mining town in WA’s Pilbara region would be an “unparalleled” task, but experts and traditional owners say it would be well worth the effort.
1 This month
Read the Public Inquiry Report, the Commissioners’ report, Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception is available to download for free at aukuspublicinquiry.com. Or just watch the replay of the National Press Club Luncheon.
4 November – Will AUKUS keep us safe – at what cost?
the Commissioners of the AUKUS Public Inquiry present their findings at the National Press Club of Australia in Canberra. iview.abc.net.au/show/national-press-club-address
Submissions to the federal government’s new draft framework close on the 13th November 2026.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
