On August 23rd, it was reported that the United States would send another multi-billion dollar aid package to Ukraine.This time, $3 billion in “security assistance” include Six additional National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS). A laser-guided rocket system (Raytheon’s M982 Excalibur). 245,000 rounds of 155 mm shells. 65,000 rounds of 120mm mortar rounds.
it will bring total US lethal and non-lethal aid to Ukraine has reached $57 billion since the war began six months ago.
America’s Seemingly Unconditional Support for Kyiv’s Maximalists purpose of warwhich include The recapture and reintegration of Crimea and Donbass leaves a clear impression that Western policy is evolving in the direction of unconditional surrender on the part of Moscow – or, from Washington’s point of view, better. is a change of government.
This seems especially true given the US-led sanctions regime that has tried to collapse the ruble and crush the Russian economy. Indeed, the US and its NATO allies appear to be pushing the current proxy war between Russia and the West into all-out war.
The goals of the Maximalist War in Kyiv gained easy American support, partly because maximalism has long been a feature of American foreign policy.
In an article he wrote in the late 1990s, columnist William Puff wrote, “The whole notion of American foreign policy in the modern age is ultimately that of a worldly agent of God’s redemptive actions. It comes from the Protestant concept of America.”
Puff and scholar and diplomat George F. Kennan criticized Woodrow Wilson’s maximalist conception of America’s involvement in World War I. Puff said that Wilson’s definition of World War I as “a war to end wars” was “a moral absolutist goal that abolishes the possibility of compromise.”
Kenan had similar thoughts. Writing in 1951, half a century before Puff, he wrote that as the First World War progressed, it “brought no rationality, humility, or a spirit of compromise to those who were at war. As it progressed, hatred hardened, its own propaganda became believable, moderates were yelled at and discredited, the purpose of war hardened and everywhere more extreme.”
Worryingly, the rhetoric of American leaders has become saturated with the language of maximalism. called Speaking to the Polish audience for the regime change in Moscow: [Vladimir Putin] Government cannot be maintained. ”
Biden and his national security team have repeatedly warned the American public that, in the president’s words, “we need to harden ourselves for the long battle ahead.”
Colin Carl, Biden’s undersecretary for policy at the Pentagon, said the new aid package is “aimed at getting what Ukraine needs in the medium to long term… It has to do with the ability to deter further aggression in the next two years.” The expectation here is that the war will last a year or two.
Kyiv’s maximalism is pushing America up the escalating ladder bit by bit. As Kennan pointed out, “A war fought in the name of high moral principles finds no early end other than some form of total domination.
Puff, who died in 2015, didn’t live to see the hysteria that characterized the present moment, but observed that Wilson’s legacy among America’s foreign policy elite was secure. bothered me.
“It’s hard to explain,” he wrote. It supports Democrats and Republicans and fuels enthusiasm for American global hegemony among policymakers and analysts. ”
Thoughtless maximalists in the U.S. foreign policy establishment largely downplay the escalating risks posed by Biden’s rhetoric and billions of dollars in lethal aid. Much of this is due to the Messiahism that has permeated America’s foreign policy tradition over the past 100 years.
Even though they are convinced of the correctness of their crusade, they downplay and even outright dismiss the possibility of diplomacy with Moscow.
We have been here before.