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.