US Senator Lindsey Graham calls for the assassination of Russian President Putin

Reportedly, a senior US Senator, Lindsey Graham has called for the assassination of Russian President Vladimir Putin. This has sparked widespread condemnation and reflects another example of Washington’s failure to adhere to the rules of law within the international community. 

The White House tried to distance itself from the remarks made by the South Carolina Senator saying they do not reflect the position of the United States. 

Some congress members did come out and criticized Lindsey Graham’s remarks. The problem is that his statements represent the US foreign policy stance. 

Graham, who is widely viewed as an influential Senator within the Republican Party on military and foreign-policy matters, made public what many senators and the US foreign policymakers think privately. 

Speaking to the US media, Graham called for a hit job on a sovereign independent head of state saying "I'm hoping someone in Russia will understand ... you need to take this guy out back any means possible.”

The hawkish Senator carried on with his threatening rhetoric, telling the US media that Russians must rise up and take Putin down.

He also carried on his intimidating statements on social media platforms, making similar calls against the Russian President.

The Senator’s statements also reflect the inability of the United States to think, act and behave rationally in times of crisis. 

As the Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov put it “Unfortunately, in such an extremely tense atmosphere, and even more so in countries such as the United States, a hysterical Russophobic fit is being whipped up. These days, not everyone manages to maintain sobriety, I would even say sanity, and many lose their mind.”

The Russian ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, denounced Graham’s remarks as unacceptable and outrageous, saying the degree of Russophobia and hatred in the US towards Russia was off the charts. 

In a statement posted on the embassy’s social media platforms, Antonov said “It is impossible to believe that a senator of a country that promotes its moral values as a guiding star for all mankind could afford to call for terrorism as a way to achieve Washington’s goals in the international arena.”

Washington’s assassination of anti-imperialist figures and independent leaders hasn’t been off the US foreign policy agenda. 

In the 1960s, the US government put together several attempts and plans to assassinate Cuban leader Fidel Castro using various methods such as exploding cigars, murderous mobsters, an exploding seashell, and the infamous poison pen.

Also in the 1960s, many political figures inside the US itself were assassinated, including one of history’s most iconic black civil rights leaders Dr. Martin Luther King as well as another very iconic black civil rights leader Malcom X. 

After the murder of former US President John F. Kennedy which shocked America, successive President’s claimed enough was enough and signed executive orders prohibiting the use of assassinations as a tactic of the US operatives.

Unfortunately, American executive orders are not worth the paper they are written on. 

There are also terrorist leaders who worked hand in hand with Washington and were later assassinated by US Special Forces instead of being captured and put on trial. Critics argue taking these individuals for instance, Osama Bin Laden, to an independent International tribunal would have exposed the level of coordination with leaders of the now many terror groups. 

Over the years, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, another sovereign head of state survived multiple American-backed attempts on his life. 
 
As lately as January 2020, the US carried out the assassination of Iran’s top military commander General Qassem Soleimani and the highest-ranking military commander in Iraq Abu Mehdi al-Muhandis with drone strikes in the vicinity of Baghdad International Airport under the direct order of former President Donald Trump.

The United Nations declared the US drone strikes against the late Iranian anti-terror war hero as unlawful and an arbitrary killing that violated the UN charter.

Again, that hasn’t stopped the US senators such as Lindsey Graham from adding fuel to the fire in Ukraine by openly calling for the killing of President Putin. 

Some congress members have hit back at the Republican Senator which critics say is aimed at distancing the US from any involvement in the Ukraine conflict, which the US and its NATO partners sparked in the first place. 

Representative IIhan Omar wrote, “I really wish our members of Congress would cool it and regulate their remarks.”

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene said, “This is irresponsible, dangerous and unhinged.”

Representative Matt Gaetz wrote, “When has Sen. Graham encouraging regime change ever ended badly?”

Even Texas Senator Ted Cruz noted, “This is an exceptionally bad idea, use massive economic sanctions; boycott Russian oil and gas; provide military aid so the Ukrainians can defend themselves.”

The problem with Cruz’s thought process is that Ukraine has lashed out at the US-led NATO alliance for abandoning Kyiv. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has chastised the bloc for its refusal to establish a no-fly zone over the country amid the ongoing Russian offensive that hit Ukraine last week.

Zelensky, in a videotaped address, told the United States and its NATO allies that people will die because of you in the country.

He said, “NATO knowingly approved the decision not to close the skies over Ukraine. We believe that the NATO countries themselves have created a narrative that the alleged closing of the sky over Ukraine will provoke direct Russian aggression against NATO”.

He also slammed the lack of aid from the alliance, saying that it has only managed to authorize a small fuel delivery for the country. While Ukraine has been recognized as a special partner of the alliance, NATO has repeatedly reminded the Ukrainian President that it would not go into a war with Russia for the sake of his country.

Zelensky said “All that the NATO alliance could do today was to allocate some 50 tons of diesel fuel for Ukraine through its procurement system.”

He also lashed out at the latest NATO meeting saying "today there was a NATO summit, a weak summit, a confused summit, a summit where it was clear that not everyone considers the battle for Europe's freedom to be the number one goal," Zelensky said

A similar statement has been made by the Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba, who said the ongoing conflict has exposed NATO’s weakness.

Speaking to Ukrainian media, Kuleba said “before the war, Ukrainian people believed that NATO was strong, while the EU was weak and indecisive. And after the war began, the people saw that the opposite was true.”

The top Ukrainian diplomat also claims that the European Union gave us a candidate status and prospects of membership, while NATO could not decide on anything. 

The reality is that Ukraine has not been given an EU candidate status, because a country needs to live up to certain conditions before attaining such a status.

The EU Parliament has only passed a non-binding resolution that states it would welcome Kyiv’s membership application. 

It’s actually not quite a difficult process to both enter or leaves the EU as Turkey and Britain found out. 

The Belarusian President, meanwhile, pointed out that the US and its Western allies want to prolong the conflict.

Alexander Lukashenko said, “All of NATO & EUmembers keep shouting about ending war in Ukraine. In public, but what they need there is war, the more of it, the better.

Lukashenko also said that the West is not allowing Ukraine to make a move to end the conflict.

 

Russia and China getting ready to create New World Order

Fifty years after Richard Nixon and Mao Zedong’s historic 1972 handshake, the geopolitical world order is once again reshaping. The world is now watching a growing alliance between Beijing and Moscow.

Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in early February this year on the opening day of the Beijing Winter Olympics.

The meeting could have granted an opportunity for Xi to urge Putin to pursue diplomacy with Ukraine and de-escalate tensions between the two countries. Instead, the Chinese regime appeared to have looked the other way as Russia planned its advances on its neighbor.

Many have described the February 04 meeting as a show of solidarity between the two regimes. The occasion was marked by a lengthy joint statement in which the two countries announced a no limits partnership, in which there were no forbidden areas of cooperation.

The 5,000-word communiqué also expressed opposition to the further enlargement of NATO and called on the North Atlantic Alliance to abandon its ideologized cold war approaches, to respect the sovereignty, security and interests of other countries … and to exercise a fair and objective attitude toward the peaceful development of other States.

Such a detailed statement clearly defined the nature of China and Russia’s emerging relationship, retired Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis told The Epoch Times. It is one wherein Xi and Putin are bent on stifling the West, dismantling NATO, and creating a new world order, he said.

Less than three weeks after the Putin-Xi meeting, Russia began its assault on Ukraine. Maginnis described the communique as a gentlemen’s agreement behind what many would consider very much an alliance. Putin, he added, is hopeful this newly forged alliance will help carry Russia through its invasion.

Behind the scenes, Maginnis suspects that the Xi-Putin rendezvous granted the “geopolitical back up and financial assurances” to Russia to soften the economic blow from Western sanctions. That the Chinese regime has not criticized Moscow for its attack on Ukraine could be a sign of Beijing’s silent support, he added.

“Xi is very likely encouraged by what the West is doing—or more appropriately, not doing,” Maginnis said. Russia has faced universal condemnation from the West, while receiving aid from several countries. Sanctions are also coming in from many directions in an effort to slow the Russian regime’s unprovoked assault.

But what’s most important to the Chinese regime is the fact that the United States is not sending troops to Ukraine, he noted.

In light of the raft of Western sanctions, Maginnis said he suspects “Xi will help launder whatever finances that Putin, the oligarchs, and the Russian government at large needs to keep moving forward.”

As the conflict in Ukraine continues to escalate and the Chinese regime continues its ambitions to seize Taiwan, he said that the United States and NATO have found themselves in a new cold war.

“Xi is seeking a new world order, as evidenced by many of his writings and speeches,” Maginnis said. This new world order, he added, is one that is “far more accepting of an authoritarian regime, rather than the liberal values that formulated the world order post-World War II.”

On the heels of a chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan and its handling of the Russia-Ukraine crisis, some countries are starting to consider the United States a second-rate world power, according to Maginnis. Some of these countries may soon be asking “Who do we want to align ourselves with?” and “Who’s going to really run things in the future?”

Maginnis didn’t consider Putin’s behavior to be “crazy” for invading Ukraine, but said that “Putin is pragmatic, not afraid of pulling the trigger if it’s going to benefit him in the long-term.”

With Russia and China working alongside each other to usurp the West, he said, “Taiwan should be greatly concerned, because it’s true of Xi as well; he would pull the same trigger when he feels like it will benefit him the most.”

Beijing is watching what the United States is doing in Ukraine. One thing to watch, Maginnis said, is whether or not the United States will transport or relocate critical assets out of the Pacific arena to Europe. Secondly, he added that Xi is also watching the effects of the sanctions on Russia’s ability to take on Ukraine.

America’s military presence in the Pacific, combined with the impact of crushing economic sanctions, remains the primary concerns of the Chinese regime as it eyes Taiwan, he said.

Can United States afford to ban export of oil and gas from Russia?

The United States may survive cutting off Russian oil and gas imports over Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, but it would almost certainly strike a massive financial toll.

Political support for banning Russian energy imports is growing in both parties, and the White House said the topic is under discussion — though it said President Joe Biden had not made a decision.  

Oil prices are already skyrocketing, and the Brent crude oil international benchmark hit a 13-year high of US$139 per barrel on fears of a ban after Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US was engaging in an active discussion about the possibility.

Russia is one of the world’s largest oil producers, with a 12% global market share, according to an analysis by JPMorgan.

Prior to the invasion of Ukraine, Russia was exporting about 6.5 million barrels daily, of which 4.3 million barrels per day were going to Europe and the United States. The US was importing about 600,000 to 800,000 barrels from Russia daily — or about 8% of the country’s supply of crude oil and petroleum products.

Cutting off that spigot will lead to higher prices unless more supply comes from somewhere.

It’s possible that the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could decide to increase supply, but there has been no indication from such countries that they will produce and export more oil to replace Russia’s, the JPMorgan analysis warned.

“The Biden team is already calling Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and others, I imagine,” said Morgan Bazilian, Director of the Colorado-based Payne Institute for Public Policy. “But their diplomatic leverage on those countries is limited, and they have shown very little appetite to be influenced by Biden and the US.”

Relations between Saudi Arabia and the Biden administration are decidedly chilled following Democratic criticism of the killing of former Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who is widely believed to have been murdered by Saudi agents.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is the day-to-day ruler of Saudi Arabia, also recently told The Atlantic in an interview, “I do not care whether Biden misunderstood things about him.”

Senior US officials also took a rare trip to Venezuela, another OPEC member, this weekend for talks about potentially easing sanctions on oil exports from that country.

Another option to take the pressure off a ban on Russian oil would be to increase US shale production, although that growth would be limited by the necessary labor and infrastructure demands, according to the JPMorgan analysis.

It is more expensive to produce oil from shale fields in West Texas than Saudi Arabia. The higher international prices could lead to increased production in the US given the economics, though relief at the pump would be a bigger question.

“Saudi Arabia is known for having the cheapest, sweetest crude oil — it takes the least amount of additional refining, very cheap to process, and it's very cheap to get out of the ground,” Gernot Wagner, a climate economist and visiting professor at Columbia Business School, told The Hill. “West Texas crude is a lot harder to get out of the ground.”

It costs less than US$10 per barrel to extract Saudi Arabian oil, whereas digging up West Texas crude costs about US$70 per barrel, according to Wagner.

“So it only really pays to get it out of the ground if the oil price is well above those US$70,” he said.

Bazilian warned that a ramp-up in domestic production would face a variety of hurdles, such as the time it takes to start pumping, financial restrictions imposed by Wall Street and an insufficient workforce.

Another wild card that could help fill the gaping hole left by Russia poses its own set of complications, Iran.

If the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal is restored, it could lead to the waiving of US sanctions, enabling Tehran to ramp up its crude supplies by one million barrels per day over the next two months, the JPMorgan analysis stated.

Bazilian described as deeply flawed the notion that cutting off Russian oil could lead to energy independence.

What would be more sensible, he argued, would be to focus more on energy security — a mix of supply, demand, markets and institutions — while finding a way to entice the US industry in the short to medium term.

“That will be tough for an administration who has climate change as a top tier priority,” Bazilian said. “Of course, that priority is not top tier today.”

Echoing these sentiments, Wagner likened a pivot away from Russian oil sources to a switch from a fast-food hamburger to a highly caloric vegan burger.

“It still produces CO2 emissions,” Wagner said. “It's still going to give you a heart attack. It might even be worse for you right at the end of the day because we don't really know what eating vegan burger does to you.”

And that sense of uncertainty is dominating global energy markets right now — in large part, Wagner explained, because we don’t know what Putin’s going to do next. But from a purely economic perspective, he said, there are certain advantages to cutting off Russian oil altogether.

“You basically rip off the risk premium,” Wagner added. “Suddenly, there's no uncertainty about what Russia will do next because it doesn't matter.”

Biden advisers weigh Saudi Arabia trip for more oil

According to Axios, President Joe Biden’s advisers are discussing a possible visit to Saudi Arabia this spring to help repair relations and convince the Kingdom to pump more oil.

A hat-in-hand trip would illustrate the gravity of the global energy crisis driven by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Biden has chastised Saudi Arabia, and the CIA believes its de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, was involved in the dismemberment of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi.

The possibility also shows how Russia's invasion is scrambling world's alliances, forcing the United States to reorder its priorities — and potentially recalibrating its emphasis on human rights.

Biden officials are in Venezuela this weekend to meet with the government of President Nicolás Maduro. Some Republicans and Democrats in Washington suggest Venezuela's oil could replace Russia's, according to the New York Times.

Any visit to the Persian Gulf would come amid a busy presidential travel schedule during the next few months.

Biden will likely take trips to Japan, Spain, Germany and, potentially, Israel, Axios has also learnt.

A White House spokesperson told Axios, “We don’t have any international travel to announce at this time, and a lot of this is premature speculation.”

President Obama visited Saudi Arabia more often than any of his predecessors, a total of four trips, but relations frayed over the wars in Yemen and Syria, as well as differences about how to deal with Iran.

President Trump made restoring the relationship a priority, and boasted about arms sales to the Kingdom.

He questioned the CIA's conclusion bin Salman was involved in Khashoggi's murder and defiantly refused to condemn him. "Maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!” Trump wrote on Twitter.

During the 2020 campaign, Biden called the Kingdom a "pariah," and early in his term, released an unclassified report assessing MBS approved the operation to "capture or kill" Khashoggi.

Bin Salman isn't making it easier on Biden to repair their relations.

He appeared to go out of his way to aggravate the White House during an interview with the Atlantic published last week.

“We don’t have the right to lecture you in America,” he said. “The same goes the other way.”

Sanctions against Russia's oil exports, including a possible ban on importing Russian oil into the US, would both elevate worldwide gas prices and stoke domestic inflation.

Biden officials want to preserve options for the president, including the chance to make amends with the Saudis and persuade them to increase their oil production.

Discussions about a potential visit are still in the early phases and officials cautioned a visit is far from finalized and may not happen.

Russian actions are also factoring into the president's other planned travel.

The invasion has sparked an international refugee crisis and raised worldwide prices, so the president wants to ensure US allies remain united. His in-person attendance at summit meetings also highlights how concern about COVID-19 has waned.

Biden's first trip this year is likely to Japan, potentially in May. He's set to meet with the other leaders of the Quad: Japan, India and Australia.

In June, he's scheduled to attend a G7 meeting in Germany. That will be followed by a NATO summit in Spain.

The European itinerary could also be expanded to include a stop in Israel, where Biden told Prime Minister Naftali Bennett he wanted to visit this spring.

Russia publishes an official list of states unfriendly to it

A list of foreign states that Russia considers as having committed unfriendly actions against Russia, Russian companies and citizens was published on the Russian government's website on Monday. 

The countries, international organizations and territories considered unfriendly include Australia, Albania, Andorra, United Kingdom, including Jersey, Anguilla, British Virgin Islands, Gibraltar, the member states of the European Union, Iceland, Canada, Liechtenstein, Micronesia, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Republic of Korea, San Marino, North Macedonia, Singapore, USA, Taiwan, Ukraine, Montenegro, Switzerland, Japan." Russia lists Taiwan as being part of China.

A complimentary item of legislation from Sunday states that Russian citizens and companies must apply for a special permit to deal with unfriendly foreign entities. 

The list was created as part of a series of laws to follow a Saturday decree by Russian President Vladamir Putin for temporary economic measures to ensure the financial stability of the Russian Federation.

Part of the measures the list was to enforce was the law that allows Russian citizens, companies and state bodies to pay back foreign creditors in rubles. 

While Israel has condemned Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, it was not included on the list. Israel has taken on a mediation role during the conflict, seeing Prime Minister Naftali Bennett flying to Moscow on Saturday to speak with Putin. 

Russia-Ukraine Conflict and Implications for South Asia

According to South Asia Journal, the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine is creating ripples in the global geopolitics. Though, the western media analysis of it as a likely cause for the world war seems far-fetched, the horrors of the limited war, undoubtedly are visible for all to see.

While the role and actions/inactions of major powers Russia, United States, Europe and NATO as a whole are to be seen and analyzed by many, in their respective ways, it would be interesting to make an assessment of implications that it will have on south Asia.

Two major powers in the region, China and India, have found themselves in an unenviable situation. Both have very close politico-strategic relations with Russia but neither wants to take an open stance against Ukraine either, on account of their proximity with US-led Europe.

It is evident that both have failed to openly support the Russian invasion of Ukraine. They have asked for peace and abstained from three crucial UN meetings on the issue, leaving Russia to resorting the UNSC Veto and fend for itself.

China has significant economic stakes in Ukraine. It is the largest trading partner. Ukraine is one of the major stakeholders of Xi Jinping’s ambitious political masterpiece Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) project. Both Russia and Ukraine are military suppliers to China as well.

In spite of Chinese political relations with Russia with no upper limit, its reactions in the ongoing conflict indicate that it was caught off-guard.

It could not anticipate Putin’s determination and failed to issue relevant advisory to its citizens in time. While Singapore and Taiwan issued guidelines to their limited number of citizens in Ukraine as early mid-February, the Chinese embassy was found clueless about the impending conflict.

Further, China has more of ideological and strategic affinities with Russia rather economic. The bilateral trade between the two at US$ 147 billion is about 2% of Chinese global trade. Its trade and economic stakes with Europe is much more important. Irrespective of the frequent diplomatic and political skirmishes with the United States, China knows very well that it cannot afford to get into a full-throttle political, economic or diplomatic battle with the US and its European allies.

India has almost 20,000 citizens in Ukraine, mostly students studying medicine there. It has major political, strategic, diplomatic and economic relations with Russia and cannot afford to antagonize it.

A major chunk Indian military supplies, including hardware and spares, along with S-400 air defense system too, come from Russia. Though in recent years, its dependence on Russia has reduced considerably, mainly due to import diversification to countries like the US, Israel, France and also due to indigenous ramping up of production and R&D capabilities in defense.

Russia has on all occasions in the last five decades stood by India, politically and diplomatically, including using the crucial veto in the UNSC once on the Kashmir issue.

Similarly, Ukraine has good working relations with India but has voted openly against India on its nuclear tests in 1998, supported the UNSC sanctions and provided a fair amount of military hardware to Pakistan, to be used against India. But of late, relations between the two are on an upswing and India would not like to jeopardize its relations with either.

A comparative cost-benefit analysis of national interests though certainly outweighs any explicit diplomatic hysteria on the lines, demonstrated by the west against Russia currently.

India is currently indulged in a delicate balancing act. It has expressed its concerns against invasion to Russia at the highest levels privately while appreciating their security concerns. It has also conveyed to the US and major European countries of its need to perceived neutrality.

At the same time, it is working in tandem with both Russian and Ukrainian governments, to ensure safety and evacuation of its citizens, at the earliest.

As for the direct and short-term implications, trade and military supplies for both China and India, are certain to be affected. Both are preparing for a significant disruption in their exports to the two warring nations.

For India, the timely supply of remaining S-400 systems are of critical significance given the uncertain state of its current politico-military relationship with China. The middle kingdom on the other hand, must be watching the outcome of this conflict keenly since it could provide it an opportunity to re-orient its possible invasion of Taiwan strategy in due course of time.

A good number Pakistanis stuck in Ukraine are students. Initially confounded and even putting up a statement of financial limitations, its government now is trying to evacuate its citizens.

India claims that many Pakistani and Turkish citizens have been evacuated from the war zone, by identifying themselves as Indian and hoisting Indian flags on their vehicles since India has strongly demanded the two warring sides, to ensure safety of its citizens who neither side wishes to antagonize.

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan visited Russia the day, Putin ordered his troops into Ukraine. For Pakistan this became a very awkward moment since the west became furious with his meeting with the perceived aggressor, Putin at that very moment.

It is also believed that National Bank of Pakistan became the first casualty with the US imposing a penalty of US$ 55 million on it while politically, the country remains at the receiving end of western fury.

Bangladesh with about 3,000 citizens stuck in Ukraine, too has good working relations with both countries. With Ukraine, its economic relations are growing rapidly and it is also helping Bangladesh in developing infrastructure, steel and ports. Similarly, Russia is politically too important to be disowned and criticized by it.

Nepal too has few citizens left in the war zone that have reportedly been evacuated by the Indian authorities and brought back home.

Maldives, the tiny island nation in the Indian Ocean has started feeling the impact of war since a considerable number of its foreign tourists involve both Russian and Ukrainians.

Though the south Asian region remains a bit far off from the battle raging on yet it has certainly affected countries there.

The Russo-Ukraine war has also resulted in delicate diplomatic balancing by countries around the world and China and India, primarily are on the radar.

The United Nations has not been successful in negotiating ceasefire, which raises another big question mark on the utility of the world body. The efficacy of the US-led NATO too raises doubts, both among its members and non-members. However, to prevent widespread destruction and disorder, the early the war is stopped the better that would be for the world and the humanity.

Is this the preamble of World War III?

A look at the list of countries flooding lethal weapons of enormous magnitude into Ukraine creates jittery feelings as if these countries are getting ready to fight World War III. These arms should be called weapons of mass destruction (WMD), a term coined before attacking Iraq.  

Russia fired shots on Ukraine on February 24. Two days later President Volodymyr Zelensky shared a video saying he needs ammunition, not a ride, referring to the United States’ offer of asylum to the besieged head of state. Since then, 15 countries have sent military hardware to Ukraine.

The majority of arms and supplies from ally nations are being sent via Ukraine’s 310-mile border with Poland, which has become an important lifeline both for supplies and equipment, and refugees looking to flee the conflict.

Some border nations have chosen not to allow military equipment bound for Ukraine to pass through their territory out of fear of Russian retaliation.

On February 28, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said his country won’t allow deadly weapons to be transported through Hungary’s territory, while reiterating the government doesn’t want to be involved in the Russia-Ukraine war. Szijjarto cited security concerns for Hungarian citizens as one of the primary factors in the decision.

Despite supply chain and shipping challenges, millions of dollars of ordnance continue to flow into Ukraine from two continents.

United States

On February 26, US President Joe Biden authorized the State Department to send US$350 million in weapons to Ukraine. Among the list of hardware on the list are Javelin anti-tank weapons, anti-aircraft systems, ammunition, and body armor.

Regarding the Russia-Ukraine war, US Acting Permanent Representative Aud-Frances McKernan said, “The United States reaffirms its unwavering support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, extending to its territorial waters.”

McKernan then added, per Biden, neither the United States nor NATO has any desire or intention to engage in a conflict with Russia, clarifying that there is no threat to Moscow from either.

This is the third time Biden has used his presidential drawdown authority to send emergency security assistance, now totaling US$1 billion, from US reserves to Ukraine.

“It is another clear signal that the United States stands with the people of Ukraine as they defend their sovereign, courageous, and proud nation,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said.

Canada

The Canadian government approved an additional US$25 million in military aid to Ukraine on February 27. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the country would send US$7.8 million worth of lethal equipment to the European nation during a press conference back on February 14 in anticipation of a Russian attack.

Regarding the initial shipment, Trudeau said, “The intent of this support from Canada and other partners is to deter further Russian aggression.”

Germany

Chancellor Olaf Sholz announced on February 26 that Germany would deliver 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 Stinger missiles to our friends in Ukraine. Scholz said February 24 marked a watershed in the history of our continent, asserting that Russian President Vladimir Putin is jeopardizing the long-term security of Europe, which he said can’t be achieved in opposition to Russia.

Sweden

In a departure from its decades-long neutrality, the Swedish government approved the shipment of 5,000 anti-tank weapons, 135,000 field rations, 5,000 helmets, and 5,000 pieces of body armor. “My conclusion is now that our security is best served by us supporting Ukraine’s ability to defend itself against Russia,” Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said on February 28. She added this is the first time Sweden has sent weapons to a country at war since the Soviet Union attacked Finland in 1939.

France

On February 26, an army spokesperson said France would send defensive military equipment to Ukraine to aid in the resistance effort against Russia. President Emmanuel Macron said, “It’s not only the Ukrainian people who are bereaved by the war … it’s all the peoples of Europe.”

United Kingdom

Back on January 17, Secretary of Defense for the United Kingdom, Ben Wallace, said the UK would provide self-defense weapons and training to Ukraine amid the build-up of Russian troops near the border. Prime Minister Boris Johnson told Parliament on February 23, “In light of the increasingly threatening behavior from Russia and in line with our previous support, the UK will shortly be providing a further package of military support to Ukraine.” He elaborated that the second military support package included both lethal and non-lethal aid.

Belgium

Responding to a direct request from Kyiv, the nation opted to send 2,000 machine guns to the Ukrainian army and 3,800 tons of fuel on February 26.

Netherlands

As of February 26, the Dutch government said it’s delivering 50 Panzerfaust 3 anti-tank weapons with 400 missiles to Ukraine to help with the resistance effort against Russia. Additionally, 200 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles were promised along with helmets, shard vests, and sniper rifles.

Czech Republic

Formerly occupied by Russian troops during the Soviet era, the Czech government sent 4,000 artillery shells worth US$1.7 million to Ukraine in January. The Czech Ministry of Defense released a statement on February 26 saying it will also ship machine guns, submachine guns, assault rifles, and pistols, together with ammunition at an estimated value of US$8.6 million.

Italy

Joining the growing list of countries providing military aid to Ukraine, on February 28, the Italian cabinet pledged to dispatch Stinger missiles, mortars, and Milan or Panzerfaust anti-tank weapons. Among the items included in the defense package are Browning heavy machine guns, MG-type light machine guns, and counter-IED systems.

Portugal

Upon request from Ukrainian officials, the Portuguese Ministry of Defense announced on February 26 that it will deliver military equipment including vests, night vision goggles, grenades, ammunition, complete portable radios, analog repeaters, and automatic G3 rifles.

Greece

The Balkan nation sent defense equipment and medical supplies on two C-130 aircraft from Athens on February 27 at the request of Ukrainian authorities.

Romania

Another former satellite state of the Soviet Union, Romanian government spokesman Dan Carbunaru said the country would ship ammunition and military equipment on February 27.

Spain

On March 02, Spanish Minister of Defense, Margarita Robles, announced the nation will send defensive equipment to Ukraine. “In this first shipment that will go aboard two planes, we expect to send 1,370 anti-tank grenade launchers, 700,000 rifles, and machine-gun rounds, and light machine guns,” Robles said.

Finland

President Sauli Vainamo Niinisto decided to send an arms support package to Ukraine on February 28. The delivery will include 2,500 assault rifles, 150,000 cartridges, 1,500 single-shot anti-tank weapons, and 70,000 combat ration packages.

United States protests Israeli refusal to back UN resolution condemning Russia

US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield protested to her Israeli counterpart over Israel's refusal to join 87 countries in backing a US-led resolution to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine at the UN Security Council, said Israeli officials.

Israel has attempted to maintain good relations with both Russia and Ukraine during the crisis, and has even offered to serve as a mediator. But that fence-sitting has resulted in criticism from both sides and now from the United States.

The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office and Foreign Ministry had been claiming for weeks that the Biden administration understood Israel's need to calibrate its reaction to the Russian invasion in order to maintain its security coordination with Russia in Syria.

But Israel dragged its feet as the US was gathering co-sponsors for the resolution and did not provide a clear answer before the meeting began. Most close US allies and partners did back the resolution.

After the vote, which Russia vetoed, Thomas-Greenfield passed a message to the Israeli Ambassador, Gilad Erdan stressing the Biden administration’s disappointment.

Eleven (11) Security Council members voted in favor of the resolution, three (China, the United Arab Emirates and India) abstained, and Russia was the lone "no" vote.

An Israeli foreign ministry official said the decision not to accept the US request to co-sponsor the resolution was due to the fact that Israel is not a member of the UN Security Council and it was clear Russia would veto.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid told Israel's Security Cabinet that the US contained the Israeli refusal to join the resolution.

“We speak to the Biden administration in a wide range of channels on various aspects of the Ukrainian issue and the bottom line is that our partners are well aware of our considerations," Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lior Haiat told Axios.

The UN General Assembly was expected to convene as early as Monday to vote on a resolution condemning Russia. Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid told the Cabinet that Israel would vote in favor.

 

Zelensky testing limits of United States

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky participated in a call with a bipartisan group of more than 280 members of Congress on Saturday morning, during which the lawmakers said he laid out ways the United States could help his country's fight against Russia.

Over Zoom, Zelensky requested additional airplanes, a stoppage of oil purchases from Russia and the establishment of a no-fly zone over Ukrainian airspace. 

Both Democrats and Republicans lauded Zelensky after their virtual meeting and pledged to do what they could to assist Ukraine.

“Honored to hear from @ZelenskyyUa as he takes every measure to defend Ukraine from illegal Russian aggression and Putin’s indiscriminate attacks on civilians. Zelenskyy’s resilience and commitment to the people of Ukraine inspire the world. Proud to stand with you Mr. President,” the Senate Foreign Relations Committee tweeted.

Sen. Ben Sasse, who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee, confirmed in a statement that Zelensky had asked for either a no-fly zone over Ukrainian airspace or planes for Ukraine.  

“Ukraine needs airpower urgently and America should send it. Zelensky’s message is simple, ‘close the skies or give us planes.’ Let’s be clear-eyed about our options, a no-fly zone means sending American pilots into combat against Russian jets and air defenses — in a battle between nuclear powers that could spiral out of control quickly,” Sasse said. 

“But Americans should absolutely send Ukrainians planes, helicopters, and UAVs. Let’s resupply Ukraine’s Air Force today and keep the Ghosts of Kyiv in the skies.”

A no-fly zone is instituted to stop nations from carrying out attacks over groups of people or flying in certain areas. 

The Biden administration balked at declaring a no-fly zone over Ukraine, arguing that the move could easily escalate the Russia-Ukraine conflict into a wider war. 

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer also voiced support to supply Ukraine with planes. 

“President Zelenskyy made a desperate plea for Eastern European countries to provide Russian-made planes to Ukraine. These planes are very much needed. And I will do all I can to help the administration to facilitate their transfer,” he said in a statement.

Several senators also noted Zelensky asked for the United States to stop Russian oil and gas imports to further cripple the country's economy. Russia accounts for 10% of the crude oil global supply, the third-largest producer after the United States and Saudi Arabia. 

“President @ZelenskyyUa said stopping the purchase of Russian oil and gas around the world would be one of the most powerful sanctions possible, ‘even more powerful than SWIFT,’ ” Sen. Dan Sullivan tweeted.

“.@POTUS, enough is enough. Listen to this brave President and a growing bipartisan group of senators. Block imports of Russian oil and gas TODAY, and produce more oil and gas from America. #StandWithUkraine #BanRussianImports,” he added.

Sen. Chris Coons, chair of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations, called on Congress to pass millions of dollars in humanitarian and economic aid for NATO and Ukraine.

Zelensky underscored the urgent need for more military support and humanitarian aid from his Western partners, Coons said in a statement. 

“This call to action must lead to swift passage by Congress of the US$10 billion in emergency supplemental aid that I have been calling for to give Ukraine and our NATO allies additional military, economic and humanitarian aid to respond to increasingly brutal Russian attacks on civilians and the rapidly growing humanitarian crisis in Eastern Europe,” he continued.

The call with the US lawmakers comes over a week after Russia invaded Ukraine. Ukrainian forces have fought fiercely against the Russian military, slowing its efforts to capture the country's major cities. 

Sen. Lindsey Graham said that Zelensky had detailed “numerous examples of war crimes” committed in Ukraine.

“There were numerous examples of war crimes provided by President Zelensky - mayors have been captured, imprisoned and murdered. There are wholesale attacks on civilian targets, random, indiscriminate, and the Putin war machine, in my view, is in full blown war crimes mode,” Graham said in a video message posted on Twitter after the call.

“President indicated that labeling Putin a war criminal is the right thing to do, and he thinks would help tremendously.”

The remarks come as roughly 1.3 million people have fled Ukraine since February 24, according to data from the United Nations refugee agency. The conflict has sparked some leaders to consider waiving travel requirements in order to handle the serious humanitarian crisis.

NATO wants bloodshed in Ukraine to continue

It has become quite clear that NATO, particularly two of its key members, the United States and Britain, has no desire for a peaceful settlement to the crisis unfolding in Ukraine.

The conflict could easily have been avoided in the first place as far back as early January this year when Russia provided several proposals to NATO and Washington on how to de-escalate the tensions by offering security guarantees.

Moscow has been calling for Ukraine, its neighbor and former Soviet republic, to be a neutral country, neither pro-Russia nor a NATO member.

From the outside that sounds like a relatively reasonable and simple demand, considering the US promised Russia it would not take measures to offer former Soviet republics, Ukraine in particular, NATO membership, a move that effectively expands the US-led military forces eastward towards Russia’s border.

For decades critics have been warning against this move and against threatening Russia and the consequences that such measures can lead to.

The last US ambassador to the Soviet Union, Jack Matlock, speaks extensively about this. He says there were definitely assurances provided to the Russians about NATO expansion. Assurances and promises that the US has broken, Washington has a culture of cheating.

But the US cheating and lies are not just limited to Russia-Ukraine. They date back to many wars and US invasions, such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere.

This crisis could have been so quickly resolved with just a treaty or a declaration of neutrality on the part of Ukraine. That would have allowed Kyiv to have warm ties with the West and the East.

Unfortunately, the US and other Western military complexes thrive on tension, it’s the only way they can persuade Congress and parliaments and convince lawmakers to vote in favor of legislation approving huge military spending.

Money that could be spent instead on rising healthcare problems, poverty, homelessness, damaged infrastructure, rising record inflation levels, and so many others issues in need of urgent attention back home.

NATO has proceeded to pump even more weapons to Ukraine, not giving a damn about the possibility of Ukrainians and Russians being killed. Critics say Ukraine is being used by imperialist powers to create a crisis with its eastern neighbor.

The colonial and imperialistic ideals of the US and its NATO military alliance also played a major role in rejecting Moscow’s proposals. Those proposals were rejected in the first few days of January and continue to be rejected today.

Washington not only placed the US weapons in Ukraine and on Russian borders threatening Moscow’s security, which is itself a violation of the UN charter.

Article-2, paragraph four of the United Nations Charter states, “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State.”

What can be more threatening than placing missiles and other weapons on another country’s border?

Even now, the US and NATO can very easily end the conflict by declaring they have no intention of including Ukraine in the Western military alliance and announce an end to NATO’s open-door policy, with which many of the newest members in Eastern Europe joined in violation of NATO owns membership rules on existing territorial disputes.

Does anyone imagine what the Pentagon’s reaction would be if Russia included Mexico or Canada as part of a defensive or military alliance, expanding Moscow’s military presence on the US borders?

Meanwhile, the US has shown no interest in peace talks between Moscow and Kyiv; despite both sides holding a second round of talks on the Belarusian border.

US State Department spokesperson Ned Price has dismissed the peace attempts saying "now we see Moscow suggesting that diplomacy take place at the barrel of a gun”.

Despite Washington's negative attitude, progress has been reported in the talks with Russia and Ukraine agreeing to the need for humanitarian corridors to help civilians escape the conflict.

The Kremlin says ‘substantial progress’ had been made in the negotiations, while the Ukrainian side pointed to an understanding on helping ordinary people.

Ukrainian Presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak noted that a temporary halt to fighting in select locations was also possible. "That is, not everywhere, but only in those places where the humanitarian corridors themselves will be located, it will be possible to cease fire for the duration of the evacuation," he said.

Ukraine and Russia have also seen eye-to-eye on the delivery of medical and food supplies to the regions where the heaviest fighting has been taking place.

Delegations from Kyiv and Moscow will meet again next week the Belarusian state news agency Belta cited Podolyak as saying.

The US and its Western allies responded by imposing more sanctions on Russia.

The United Nations has said one million people have now fled, seeking refuge in neighboring countries mostly in Poland and also Russia.

While Ukraine has essentially been left abandoned by Washington (much to the frustration of Kyiv), the US first lady Jill Biden did wear a Covid-19 mask in honor of Ukraine, which will no doubt help towards finding peace to the conflict.

Then comes the British and American officials and their mainstream media’s double standards on the unfortunate conflict in Ukraine.

US administration officials and their British government counterparts say that occupied people in Ukraine have the absolute right to take up arms against an (imaginary) occupier.

While the argument is legally and logically correct; why has it been used only now and only for Ukraine where Washington and London are shedding crocodile tears for the Ukrainians instead of making real attempts at ending the fighting instead of abandoning what NATO describes in public as its ally.

And why is the same not said about the Palestinians who have been resisting the Israeli occupation for decades? Palestinians are instead referred to as “terrorists” for resisting the Israeli regime's occupation of their land.

The reality is Russia is not occupying Ukrainian land and has stated it has no intention of doing so, in addition to the fact that the conflict has not lasted for more than 10 days.

On the other hand, for 100 years, the Palestinians have been subject to occupation and they are denied weapons as an occupied people to resist an occupier and those who try to send weapons to the Palestinian resistance fighting the occupation are punished.

Essentially the West has shot itself in the foot for making such statements of double standards. It’s one rule for Ukraine because NATO is involved here and another for Palestine.

And what about other people who are under occupation? Do the occupied people in Iraq have the absolute right to take up arms against the US occupation? An occupation that has been classified as such by Iraqi parliament legislation, the country’s Prime Minister, and a million man march in Baghdad.

Anti-US sentiment is so high in Iraq right now after Washington assassinated General Qassem Soleimani, who commanded the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, and Abu Mehdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of the anti-terror popular mobilization units and arguably the most respected and decorated military commander in Iraq.

Under the logic of the US administration and the British government, shouldn’t the Iraqis have the absolute right to take up arms against the occupiers; instead of being labeled as terrorists?

What about Syria, where American forces illegally occupy large parts of the country’s east and northeast. The US entered the country from Iraq without an invitation from the government in Damascus and without a UN mandate so the Syrians have the absolute right to resistance against the US forces.

And the same of course can be said for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon who have been liberating their land from Israeli occupation.

But this slip of the tongue will soon be totally forgotten about once NATO gets what it wants from the conflict in Ukraine.

 

Neighbors are priority for Iran, says Raisi

On Friday, President Ayatollah Seyed Ebrahim Raisi stressed that dealing with all countries of the world is on the agenda of his government, and that neighboring countries take priority in developing the country's foreign diplomacy.

In a press statement issued at the end of his visit to Golestan Province in northeastern Iran, Raisi said a balanced view prevails in Iranian foreign policy and attention to the East or West is not on the agenda.

He pointed out that some former officials put their hopes on the West, which resulted in the suspension of the country's activities, but despite Iran’s current negotiations with the Westerners and its efforts to lift sanctions, Tehran relies on its zealous youth to preserve national independence and power.

Raisi stated that some of his government's actions in expanding neighborly relations or strengthening ties with the regional countries are interpreted as “look to the East,” adding, "Our message is that there should be a balance in foreign relations. In the past, the view of the West in the field of foreign policy was heavy and all the government had hoped was in the hands of the West."

"The country cannot be limited to relations with certain countries," he said, adding, "The country must move forward. For example, in the core negotiations, our hope is first in God and then in the Iranian people. We do not hope for a miracle in Vienna. We seek to lift sanctions, but more importantly, we seek to neutralize sanctions."

The President also said his government plans to use the capacity of the North-South corridor to economically develop the eastern part of the Caspian Sea. Pointing to the status of this region in expanding neighborly relations, he said, "The government has put interaction with all countries around the world, especially neighboring countries, on the agenda."

Ayatollah Raisi added, "Today, relations with neighbors are not commensurate with the existing capacities, and our economic and trade interactions with neighboring countries can be at a much higher level. During my travels to neighboring countries, since the beginning of the government, it became increasingly clear to me that the capacities of the country's neighborhood relations have not been realized as they should be put in practice."

The President said, "During our visit to Turkmenistan, which happens to be a neighbor to Golestan province, we came to the conclusion through negotiations that there is a lot of potential for improving the level of relations, and one of these capacities was the gas swap agreement, which contributes to not having gas outages in the northern regions of the country."

Ayatollah Raisi also pointed to his government’s plans to solve the people’s problems. 

Speaking in a press conference at the end of his trip to Golestan province on Friday evening, Ayatollah Raisi said, "The proposals for resolving the problems were prepared and finalized in a meeting with the first vice-president," according to the official website of the presidency.

Saying that Golestan province is one of the agricultural hubs of the country, the president added, "In Golestan province, unlike most parts of the country, the population of villages has not decreased and therefore in this trip, most of the funds allocated to Golestan were allocated to agriculture to address the concerns of the people in the field of agriculture."

Raisi also talked about the state of industry in Golestan province. "We also have industrial towns in Golestan province, but the industry in the province is not as prosperous as it should be and therefore it was decided to form a working group under the Governor General and with the presence of representatives of related agencies including the Ministry of Industry."

 

Bangladesh pledges to do business with Russia despite international sanctions over Ukraine

According to a report by The Bangladesh Chronicle, Bangladesh will carry on with completing its first nuclear energy plant being built by Russia and will not stop doing business with Moscow, despite many other nations imposing sanctions over the invasion of Ukraine. This was the consensus of Sheikh Hasina, Prime Minister and other officials.

Russia is constructing as well as financing 90% of the total cost for the Ruppur Nuclear Power Plant (RNPP) in Pabna, a district in northwestern Bangladesh. In late 2017, the Russian state-run nuclear energy firm Rosatom began constructing the plant, which has a price-tag of nearly US$13 billion, and is expected to complete in mid-2023.

“The work of the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant is progressing speedily and the government has a plan to install another nuclear power plant,” Hasina announced.

While the Prime Minister said the project remained a go, geopolitical analysts and economists told BenarNews that uncertainty over its implementation has increased after nations including the United States, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and Canada penalized Russia’s central bank and excluded some Russian banks from the SWIFT system. The system is a network used by banks to allow financial transactions across the globe.

Mustafa Kamal, Bangladesh’s Finance Minister, said officials could look for alternative transaction options following the decision on SWIFT.

A currency swap could be one of the options, he said after approving a proposal to purchase 30,000 tons of potassium chloride fertilizer valued at US$17.4 million (1.5 billion taka) from Russia’s Foreign Economic Corp.

“That purchasing fertilizer from Russia was not a new thing. We will try to continue to import items from Russia,” he said, adding that if Moscow failed to deliver, the government would explore alternative sources.

A spokesman for Bangladesh’s central bank, Serajul Islam, said he expected Bangladesh to continue transactions with Russian banks not affected by the sanctions.

In addition, “Bangladesh Bank already sent a letter to the Finance Ministry to allow us to do a currency swap with the country to avoid SWIFT-related restrictions,” he told BenarNews.

After a National Economic Council meeting chaired by Hasina on Wednesday, Planning Minister Mannan said the construction of the nuclear plant would not be affected by the outbreak of the war in Ukraine because of a bilateral agreement with Moscow.

“Bangladesh is against any war. The Prime Minister has clearly said we are a peace-loving country. We want peace, not war,” Mannan told BenarNews.

“Though they are fighting, both the countries are friends of Bangladesh. Ukraine is our friend. And Russia has been our friend for a long time. We always recognize the Russian role in our Liberation War,” he said, referring to the 1971 war of independence from Pakistan that led to Bangladesh’s birth as a nation.

He made the comments the same day Bangladesh abstained from voting on a United Nations General Assembly resolution, which condemned Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and demanded that Moscow immediately withdraw its troops from its neighbor next-door. As many as 141 UN member-states voted in favor, while five voted no and 35 abstained.

Meanwhile, a Bangladeshi media consultant representing Rosatom released a statement from the company to BenarNews without elaborating.

“No disruption is foreseen in any of the commitments and work schedules in the construction of the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant,” it stated.

A Bangladeshi who is a worker on the project said he and other employees had always been paid on time for their work in constructing the plant, but many were now concerned about whether they would still receive a steady paycheck because of the Ukraine invasion.

“Though the authorities assured us that payments would be done normally and the work environment is still normal at the project site, many workers are worried about the future,” Hasan Miazi told BenarNews.

If Russian President Vladimir Putin does not end the invasion or withdraw his forces from Ukraine soon, that could have a negative impact on the project in Bangladesh, according to a professor at Dhaka University.

“Not only Bangladesh, but countries who have financial relations or projects with Russia all will be in trouble. This crisis will come into the fore within three months if the war does not stop,” Delwar Hossain, a Professor of International Relations, told BenarNews.

“As such mega-projects must be prepared for unexpected situations, the current conflict will not hamper it if the war ends immediately,” he said.

Bangladesh could end up paying if the ongoing conflict brings an end to the construction project, another academic said.

“Uncertainty over such mega-projects creates serious problems for countries like Bangladesh. Bangladesh would be bound to repay Russia the credit given for the project,” Anu Muhammad, a Professor of Economics at Jahangirnagar University, told BenarNews.

Meanwhile, a security analyst expressed the need to move ahead cautiously.

“Any wrong move in dealing with Russia can put Bangladesh under sanctions. So Bangladesh should be alert of every global development in the Russia-Ukraine issue,” said Abdur Rashid, a retired major-general.

 

Reactions from Middle East and North Africa (MENA) to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

I am obliged to share with my readers the official statements of countries, usually dancing to the mantra of the United States. This report has been compiled by James F. Jeffrey and Merissa Khurma of Wilson Centre.

On Thursday, February 24, Russia launched a series of missile attacks against locations near Ukrainian capital Kiev, an assault that quickly spread across the country by land, sea, and air. The enormity of the Russian attack, not just on Ukraine but on the long-term global security order, is increasingly clear among states in the Middle East region, and puts pressure on the ‘hedging’ between the US on one hand and Russia and China on the other, commonplace in recent years. 

Middle East countries, including the close military and diplomatic partners of United States, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Israel, initially hedged their bets between the two superpowers. However, the continued Russian aggression has pushed almost all into the Ukraine camp. Turkey has been particularly vocal from President Erdogan supporting Ukraine bilaterally and in NATO, and then taking the unprecedented step of restricting Russian naval transport of the of the Bosphorous Straits under the war clause of the Montreux Straits Convention, which Turkey controls. 

The regional shift was seen on March, 02, 2022 when 141 countries voted in favor of the UN General Assembly resolution to condemn Russian forces. From Middle East and North Africa (MENA), Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey voted ‘Yes’, Syria voted ‘No’, and Algeria, Iraq, and Iran abstained. Algeria has long been pro-Moscow and Iraq, given its internal situation, avoids taking sides. Syria's vote is not unexpected. Iran clearly seeing itself as a potential target of attack, abstained rather than supporting Russia, not so much for Ukraine but for the principle of non-interference in sovereign states. 

A region mostly united

Initially, most Arab governments maintained a neutral stance on the Russian invasion of Ukraine, unsurprisingly, given their reticence to pick a side that they believe may jeopardize their relations with the United States and the Europeans and their equally strategic relations with Russia. In a statement delivered by Saudi UN representative Mohammed Abdulaziz Alateek at the General Assembly, the GCC countries confirmed “the depth of relations” they have with both parties and called on “all parties to exercise restraint.”

Nevertheless, Saudi Arabia remains firm in standing with its OPEC plus agreement that is keeping oil prices high rather than pumping more crude oil to help the United States and the West, at America’s insistence. Whether the Kingdom maintains this position or contributes to bringing oil prices down in the weeks to come remains to be seen and depends on how far Putin goes in Ukraine. 

The notable exception to the neutral Arab stance was of course Syria, whose President Bashar Al Assad reiterated his support for Russia in his call to President Putin and called the Russian invasion in Ukraine a “correction of history.” A staunch ally of Russia, that kept him in power since the beginning of the Arab uprisings, the Syrian President will likely feel emboldened by a seemingly ‘stronger’ Russia, which also gives other regional powers, namely Iran, more opportunities to strengthen its influence in Syria and destabilize the neighborhood. 

Leaders across the region react

Egypt

On February 25 via Twitter, Egypt's Minister of Foreign Affairs (unofficial translation from Arabic to English), “The Arab Republic of Egypt is following with deep concern the successive developments regarding the situation in Ukraine, and affirms the importance of upholding dialogue and diplomatic solutions, as well as endeavors that would hasten the political settlement of the crisis in a manner that preserves international security and stability, and ensures that the situation does not escalate or deteriorate, and thus to avoid aggravating humanitarian and economic conditions, with their impacts on the region and worldwide.”

Iran

On February 22, Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh commented that the latest developments in Ukraine, noting, "interference and provocative measures by NATO and led by the US have made things more complicated in this region.” Via Twitter on February 24, Iran's Foreign Ministry tweeted, "The Ukraine crisis is rooted in NATO's provocations. We don't believe that resorting to war is a solution.

Israel

On February 27, Israeli PM Naftali Bennett spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin, offering Israel's support as a mediator in the crisis. On February 24 Israel's Foreign Minister Yair Lipid stated, "The Russian attack on Ukraine is a serious violation of the international order. Israel condemns the attack, and is ready and prepared to provide humanitarian assistance to the citizens of Ukraine. Israel is a country that has experienced wars, and war is not the way to resolve conflicts.”

Jordan

On February 24, Jordan said it is following with "concern" the current developments in Ukraine, and called on the international community and the parties to the conflict to exert maximum efforts for restraint and de-escalation. In a statement, the Kingdom's Ministry of Foreign Affairs called for a peaceful settlement of the conflict and the restoration of security and stability in the region through dialogue and negotiations in these "critical" times. The statement cited Jordan's ambassador to the United Nations Mahmoud Hmoud during a UN General Assembly session, held to discuss the "situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine", as saying that "Jordan underscores the positive and effective role of the UN and the stakeholders to reach that goal". The envoy stressed Jordan's call for respecting the international law, the UN Charter, the sovereignty and regional integrity of states and the principles of good neighborliness.

Lebanon

On February 24, Lebanon's Minister of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants Abdullah Bou Habib condemned the invasion. 

Qatar

On February 25, Qatar's Secretary-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Dr. Ahmed bin Hassan Al Hammadi met with Ambassador of Ukraine to Qatar Andrey Kosmenko to review bilateral cooperations. On February 24, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani held a phone call with Russia's Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov, followed by Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs Dmytro Kuleba. According to Qatar's State News Agency, Sheikh Al-Thani, "expressed the Qatar's concern over this escalation and its repercussions and urged all parties to exercise restraint and resolve the dispute through constructive dialogue and diplomatic methods."

Turkey

On February 25, President Tayyip Erdoğan responded to reporters that, "NATO should have taken a more decisive step." On February 24, Turkey’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs released the statement, "We consider the military operation launched by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation against Ukraine unacceptable and reject it. This attack, beyond destroying the Minsk agreements, is a grave violation of international law and poses a serious threat to the security of our region and the world. Believing in the necessity to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of countries, Türkiye is against changing of borders by use of arms. We call on the Russian Federation to immediately stop this unjust and unlawful act. Our support for the political unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine will continue."

United Arab Emirates

On March 1, the UAE suspended visa-free travel for Ukrainians and abstained from the United Nations resolution condemning Russia for the invasion. On February 27 via Twitter, UAE senior politician Anwar Gargash affirmed the country will not declare sides in the war. On Wednesday, February 23 the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed conducted a phone call with Russia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs to discuss their strategic partnership. 

 

 

United States supplying arms to Ukraine rather than negotiating ceasefire

The United States has contributed over US$1 billion to help Ukraine’s military over the past year and has pledged more aid as Russia’s week-long war against the country continues. Washington has reportedly sent hundreds of stinger missiles as part of the latest package of defensive aid. 

White House has also asked Congress to authorize an additional US$10 billion in security, humanitarian, and economic assistance for Ukraine.

But as the war presses on, the US will have to change its strategy on how to get that aid to Ukraine, as well as evaluate how to help Ukraine survive a longer-term conflict through security and humanitarian aid.

Over the past six months, President Joe Biden has used his presidential drawdown authority three times, a power that allows a president to respond to unforeseen emergencies without legislative sign-off. The most recent use of this authority is US$350 million in security assistance the president approved.

Jessica Lewis, Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, told the House Armed Services Committee that the package included Javelin anti-tank missiles, which can be carried and launched by a single person. 

“Those are probably the most impactful weapons that we can provide the Ukrainians because they can be used by individuals from ambush positions or in lots of different circumstances and they can pretty reliably kill Russian tanks,” said Frederick Kagan, Director of the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute.

The US has also reportedly sent Ukraine hundreds of Stinger anti-aircraft missile defense systems, which can be deployed by ground forces to shoot at targets in the air.

Kagan said it’s harder to take down Russian aircraft with the anti-aircraft systems, but they can absolutely become a nightmare for Russian helicopters.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that the US continues to work bilateral partners to rush defensive equipment to Ukraine, and that such equipment is being delivered to troops fighting Russia. But sending additional equipment to Ukraine will get harder as Russia continues its invasion.

Due to time constraints, the Ukrainian military will need things that it can train on quickly—things like ammunition, Javelins, and Stingers.

“That puts a significant constraint on what we can provide, you know, because it has to be very short-term focused,” said Mark Cacian, a senior adviser to the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ International Security Program.

“I think as time goes on; you're probably going to see a lot more munitions flowing because modern wars just use up a lot of ammunition — militaries tend not to stockpile a lot of it,” he continued. “So, some of it's just going to be bullets and things like that.”

The US has also had to reconsider how it delivers weapons, as it cannot fly planes directly over Ukrainian airspace due to the conflict. But smaller weapons systems can still be sent via ground transportation.

Leah Scheumann, a former Pentagon official now at the Atlantic Council, pointed out that some of the ground routes being used to deliver security aid are also being used by Ukrainians looking to flee the conflict.

“No one is better at logistics and the US military,” she said. “So, we can help sustaining these key land routes so that when we're talking about all these aid packages that are under consideration right now in Congress, that aid actually needs to be able to get into the country.”

The Biden administration has been clear about not sending troops directly into the conflict, though it has sent roughly 15,000 troops to bolster NATO’s eastern flank over the past couple of months.

And the idea of establishing a no-fly zone over Ukrainian airspace has been shot down as a non-starter in Washington — as doing so would involve US troops possibly shooting down Russian aircraft, raising fears of rapid escalation into a world war. 

Short of sending troops directly into the conflict, there are still other options on the table for helping Ukraine resist Russia’s invasion, experts say.

“If the war goes on for a long time, then there are other things you could do,” Cacian said. “We could train Ukrainians outside of Ukraine. We could think about introducing a new type of equipment, but you know, that's if the war goes months.”

It will be just as important to send humanitarian assistance, including food, medicines, and fuel supplies, to help the Ukrainian people cope with the war.

“I think as we focus on getting weapons to Ukrainians, we also need to be really focused on getting all of the life support to the Ukrainians that they're going to need to make it through his conflict, and then be okay on the other side of it,” Kagan said.