On Sunday, Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a responsible government official heading foreign affairs and representing the United States on the global stage, “casually suggested” that Poland could hand over its entire fleet of 28 Soviet-era MiG-29s to Ukraine, desperate for imposing no-fly zone, and, in return, the United States government would “backfill” the Polish Air Force with American F-16s.
“We are looking actively now at the question of airplanes
that Poland may provide to Ukraine, and looking at how we might be able to
backfill it should Poland decide to supply those planes,” Speaking alongside
Moldovan President Maia Sandu, Blinken told a briefing in Chisinau on Sunday,
March 6.
Upon getting wind of the “facetious remark” by the
charismatic secretary of state idolized by diplomatic community for wavy salt-and-pepper
hair and suave Parisian etiquette, Russian defense spokesman Igor Konashenkov
issued a stark warning that any attempt by an outside power to facilitate a
no-fly zone over Ukraine, including providing air strips and aircraft to Kyiv, would
be considered a belligerent in the war and treated accordingly.
Hours after the Russian warning, the Polish Foreign
Ministry issued an emphatic denial, saying providing aircraft to Ukraine
was out of question as the MiG-29 fleet constituted the backbone of the Polish
Air Force. In a bizarre turn of events overnight, however, Poland announced
yesterday, March 8, it was ready to transfer the aircraft to the Ramstein Air
Base in Germany at the disposal of the United States which could then hand them
over to Ukraine.
But the denouement of the diplomatic fiasco came today,
March 9, after the United States, occupying a high moral ground, categorically
rejected the preposterous Polish offer, initially made on Warsaw’s behalf by
none other than the US secretary of state.
The prospect of flying combat aircraft from NATO territory
into the war zone “raises serious concerns for the entire NATO alliance,” the
Pentagon sanctimoniously revealed today. “It is simply not clear to us that
there is a substantive rationale for it,” Pentagon spokesman John Kirby
dignifiedly added.
Only two conclusions could be drawn from the risible gaffe: either
the inept secretary of state was unaware of the Pentagon’s “serious concerns”
regarding flying combat aircraft from NATO territory into the war zone while
initially floating the bizarre proposal, or the reluctant Polish offer of
transferring its entire fleet of MiG-29s to Ramstein at the disposal of the
United States was nothing more than a humbug designed to provide face-saving to
its NATO patron while it was already decided behind the scenes that Washington
would spurn Poland’s nominal offer.
As for NATO’s “gracious favor” of deciding not attempting to
enforce no-fly zone over Ukraine, which is being propagated as a “concession to
Russia” and “peaceful intentions” of the transatlantic military alliance by the
corporate media, it’s worth pointing out that no-fly zones could only be
enforced against Third World countries, such as Gaddafi’s Libya or Saddam’s
Iraq, whose air forces only had several dozen creaking old aircraft bought in
scrap following the Second World War.
Though it stretches credulity, even if NATO decides to
impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine, who is going to implement the impossible
decision of enforcing no-fly zone against one of the top air forces in the
world? If anything, Russia is now going to enforce no-fly zone for hostile
aircraft in Ukraine’s airspace by deploying S-400 missile defense systems
following the impending fall of Kyiv. Taking a backseat in the Ukraine conflict
by the NATO powers isn’t a “goodwill gesture” to Russia, rather it’s an issue
of lacking military capacity to confront resurgent Russia under Putin’s astute
leadership.
How ironic that despite investing trillions of dollars over
decades on their lethal military-industrial complex, all the global bullies
could do is sow chaos and mayhem across the Third World but are left with no
other choice than turning the proverbial other cheek if confronted with equal
military powers, such as Russia and China.
Despite covertly mounting proxy war against Russian forces
in Ukraine by providing funds, arms and training to myriad heavily armed
militias allied with Ukraine’s security forces, NATO hesitating to directly
engage with Russian ground and air forces is predicated on the premise that if
the conflict spirals into a nuclear war, it would be catastrophic not only for
belligerents but also for the whole world.
Even if the likelihood of a nuclear war is excluded for
argument’s sake, bratty Zelensky throwing temper tantrums and fervently cajoling
macho Uncle Sam to impose a no-fly zone would remain a puerile fantasy. NATO’s
fancy albeit outmoded aircraft are simply not a match for venturing into
air-to-air dogfights with Russia’s technologically superior Sukhoi fighter
jets, globally acclaimed S-400 air defense systems and cutting-edge hypersonic
missiles.
Built by Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics in the eighties,
over a dozen F-16 aircraft have crashed in Pakistan alone. Its flight safety
record is worse than the flying funeral hearse Boeing 737 Max. Aviation
aficionados have recommended that Pakistan Air Force should only induct JF-17s,
co-produced with China, instead of wasting billions of dollars foreign exchange
on substandard American junk. As for C-130 transport aircraft and B-52 bombers
built in the fifties following the Second World War, those “Hindenburg’s Zeppelins”
rightfully belong in vintage aerospace exhibition rather than being inducted in
modern air forces.
The Pentagon publicly confessed to over 30
Broken Arrows [1], serious nuclear accidents, including accidentally
dropping atom bombs on populated areas in the US and Europe that thankfully
didn’t explode, though the real number of such nuclear accidents is calculated
to be in thousands, particularly at the height of the Cold War during the
sixties when such apocalyptic “accidents” were everyday occurrence. What could
be more irrefutable rebuttal of much-touted flight safety record of US
strategic bombers, transport aircraft and fighter jets?
Notwithstanding, Volodymyr Zelensky reassured
his compatriots [2] last week: “Ukraine is already welcoming foreign
volunteers who are coming to our country. First ones from 16,000. They are
coming to defend freedom, defend life. For us, for everyone. And it will be a
success, I’m sure.” Not surprisingly, he did not disclose who those thousands
of “daredevil volunteers” willing to sacrifice lives and limbs in a foreign war
were.
The Times
reported [3] on March 4 that defense contractors were recruiting former
military veterans for covert operations in Ukraine for a whopping $2,000 a day:
“The job is not without risk but, at almost $60,000 a month, the pay is good.
Applicants must have at least five years of military experience in eastern
Europe, be skilled in reconnaissance, be able to conduct rescue operations with
little to no support and know their way around Soviet-era weaponry.”
Thus, the Pope’s call to arms to fellow Christians around
pious Christendom in defense of the hallowed land of bourgeois democracy and
market-oriented values in the face of fierce onslaught by pagan hordes of
infidel Ruskies hell bent on desecrating venerable Article 5 of the sanctified
transatlantic treaty is more about getting a lion’s share in the war booty
rather than defending the Catholic faith as such. Not surprisingly thousands of
God-fearing and democracy-loving Christians across Europe and North America
have heeded the Pope’s call to arms to mount the epic Crusade in the Kingdom of
Kyivan Rus’.
The United States and its allies have reportedly
pumped [4] over $3 billion in arms into Ukraine since the 2014 Euromaidan
coup, and committed to send over $850 million more in military aid late last
month. The Biden administration has already delivered about $240 million of its
promised $350 million in additional military equipment to Ukraine, with the
rest expected to arrive in the coming days or weeks at the latest. In addition,
the European Union promised to commit nearly 500 million euros for its own
military aid package.
Most of the last month’s $850 million military assistance
package was spent on recruiting mercenaries for Ukraine’s proxy war and
providing 2,000 surface-to-air missiles and antitank Javelins and NLAWs to
Ukraine’s security forces and allied irregular militias, which are still in the
process of being trained for using the sophisticated military equipment.
The Politico
reported [5] today, March 9, that the Congress’ proposed $1.5 trillion
package to fund the federal government through September would boost national
defense coffers to $782 billion, about a 6 percent increase. On top of the
hefty budget increase, the package was set to deliver nearly $14 billion in
emergency funding to help Ukraine, nearly twice the assistance package
initially proposed, including $3 billion for US forces and $3.5 billion for
military equipment to Ukraine, plus more than $4 billion for US humanitarian efforts.
In order to create an “international legion” comprising
foreign mercenaries, Kyiv lifted visa requirements for anyone willing to fight.
“Every friend of Ukraine who wants to join Ukraine in defending the country,
please come over,” Zelensky pleaded at a recent press conference, adding “We
will give you weapons.”
Ukraine has already declared martial law and a general
mobilization of its populace. Those policies include conscription for men aged
18-60 and the confiscation of civilian vehicles and structures, while Ukrainian
convicts with military experience are being released from prison to back up the
war effort.
In a show of solidarity with Ukraine, several European
nations recently announced they would not only not criminalize but rather
expedite citizens joining the NATO’s war effort in Ukraine, despite being aware
of the lamentable fate of a similar botched policy of enlisting volunteers for
proxy wars in Libya and Syria, particularly from diaspora community of those
countries, who later returned to Europe and carried out some of the most
audacious terror attacks.
The wounds of the Manchester Arena bombing at Ariana
Grande’s concert in May 2017, claiming 22 innocent lives and hundreds wounded,
by a Libyan expat Salman Abedi, whose brother Hashem Abedi was found guilty of
22 counts of murder in March 2020, are still fresh in the minds of families of
the victims. Who would be responsible after armed and violent “volunteers”
having fought in the brutal proxy war in Ukraine return home to their native
countries and commit wanton acts of vandalism and terrorism?
The myopic and reckless Western policy of lending
indiscriminate support to militants in order to topple the Arab nationalist
government of Colonel Gaddafi in Libya and the anti-Zionist government of
Bashar al-Assad in Syria was directly responsible for the spate of terror
attacks in Europe from 2015 to 2017.
After a lull of almost a decade since the horrific Madrid
and London bombings in 2004 and 2005, respectively, when the Western powers
decided to train and arm militant groups in border regions of Turkey and Jordan
straddling Syria from 2011 to 2014, the first incident of terrorism occurred on
the Western soil at the offices of Charlie Hebdo in January 2015, and then the
Islamic State carried out the audacious November 2015 Paris attacks, the March
2016 Brussels bombings, the June 2016 truck-ramming incident in Nice, and three
gruesome terror attacks took place in the United Kingdom in 2017, and after
that the militant group carried out the Barcelona attack in August 2017.
Citations:
[1] When
US Air Force accidentally dropped atomic bomb on South Carolina:
[2] 16,000
volunteers coming to Ukraine, Zelensky:
[3] Western
mercenaries offered $2,000 a day to fight Putin:
[4] US
provided over $3 billion in arms to Ukraine since the 2014:
[5] $14 billion military and humanitarian assistance for Ukraine:
No comments:
Post a Comment