On Tuesday, the United States was forced to close its embassy in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev, and required all its workers to enter shelters if sirens were heard, in light of fears of a massive Russian attack on Kiev, and the targeting of American buildings in response to Washington allowing Kiev to use long-range Atakms missiles to strike… Russian depth.
In an analysis published by the American magazine “National Interest,” Daniel L. said: Davis, a fellow and military expert at the Defense Priorities Foundation and a former officer in the US Army, said it is not clear what prompted the US President Joe BidenAt this late stage of the war and at the last minute of his presidency, taking action carries with it the risk of significantly escalating the war, and it is very clear that this decision represents a significant and unnecessary risk to the United States, while increasing the odds of defeating Ukraine, and not the other way around.
On the other hand, there are well-known figures in Washington who praised Biden’s decision to allow Ukraine to use Atakms missiles To attack targets deep inside Russia.
Former generals Jack Keane, Barry McCaffrey and Wesley Clark came out in support of the president’s decision, while Keane criticized having too many restrictions on the use of… American missiles In Ukraine.
“These generals who trumpet the first war slogan have provided disastrous advice on television throughout this conflict,” Davis said, noting that in September of last year, when the failure of the Ukrainian summer offensive was revealed, General David Petraeus declared that Ukraine was still capable of causing… In the “collapse” of the Russian defences, while Davies wrote months before the start of the summer offensive that the basics of the war showed that Ukraine It has almost no chance of success. Does a former four-star general who held the highest positions in the US military not understand these basics even months after failure was clearly visible to continue to claim that the Russians will collapse?
Davies says that “in July 2023, one month after the start of the Ukrainian summer offensive and two months after Petraeus claimed that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s forces were still capable of smashing the Russian defenses, he wrote an article in which he said that it was clear that the offensive had failed. And that it was the wisest, most rational, and most moral course.” For Kiev and the West, it is “to seek a negotiated settlement that preserves the greatest possible amount of freedom and territory for Kiev, and that ending the war would stop the series of killing and wounding of tens of thousands.” “From Ukraine’s brave and heroic fighters who Kiev will need to rebuild their country once the war is over.”
This, says Davies, “reveals the reality of the difficult position of the Ukrainian forces before, during and after the attack. However, the country’s senior generals ignored it.” USThey advised Western governments to continue the war, which led to the deaths of thousands of Ukrainians who might have survived if Biden had acknowledged basic military facts in the summer of 2023 and sought a negotiated settlement to the war.
“Today the reality is starker,” Davis adds. “The number of long-range missiles the United States is giving to Ukraine will not change anything. These missiles alone cannot change the dynamics of the battlefield – just like the previous entry of Western tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery pieces, and defensive weapons.” Kiev has lost the war. This is the only truth. Continuing to ignore reality – and listen to the generals – will increase the ultimate cost of losing the war to the Russians For Ukraine, however, what Biden is doing now is worse because he risks expanding the war, which could drag the United States into direct conflict with Russia“.
Russia was clear in its statements that the introduction of American or Western long-range missiles into the war against Russia represents a direct involvement of the West against Russia and imposes a “response” on it.
Davis says, “The risk of expanding the war by allowing the use of long-range American weapons against Russia represents an extremely reckless risk, especially since this does not achieve any military benefit for Ukraine, but rather represents a major strategic risk represented by the possibility of Washington’s involvement in the war, and although President Previous Donald Trump won the last presidential election because he pledged to end the war in Ukraine. Biden’s latest risk may destroy any chance he may have. Trump To achieve peace.”
