Peace Agreement to End the Ukraine War
A discussion with the former CIA Director of Russia analysis
A peace agreement will be almost impossible to achieve. Russia considers itself to be fighting an existential threat from NATO and demands that Ukraine restore its neutrality and accept territorial concessions. Even if Trump accepts these conditions, it would be difficult to sell such a peace agreement to Washington, the Europeans and the Ukrainians. As NATO expansionism triggered the war, it is unlikely that even NATO security guarantees to Ukraine would be acceptable in any peace agreement. A peace agreement has more chance to succeed if it is based on the recognition that the Ukraine War is not only a conflict between Ukraine and Russia but primarily a conflict between NATO and Russia. A peace agreement attempting to resolve the destructive zero-sum European security architecture could produce a positive-sum approach to security that benefits Ukraine, Russia and the NATO countries.
Whats hard to swallow is that the criminals responsible for the agonising situation persist in brashly insisting on their obscenely comfortable selves as the saints of the saga, who by their false self definitions and infantile grandiose claims to abject deference, remain impervious to the horrific consequences of their vainglorious machinations, as they must, or be driven by overwhelming self loathing to slit their own throats with luxury hotel cutlery at one or other of their self-congratulatory banquets, where they higgle and haggle politely over the anticipated real estate returns to unbridled investment in predatory genocide.
May they look in the mirror one morning and see what is really there, those Nulands and Clintons and Bidens and Obamas clinking glasses of champagne over the mountains of corpses they have created, like any Nazi in a concentration camp. Did I forget that Graham character?
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I'll repeat a point I made recently, probably on Glenn's Substack, about the democratic deficit in US foreign policy. George Beebe is just the latest highly impressive former member of the upper echelons of US governmental architecture to allude to the possibility/probability that a sitting US president in Donald Trump could be thwarted from delivering a peace deal by, as he put it, "the Washington foreign policy establishment". So what's the purpose of the president then, if this shadowy junta are controlling the US military? Is he just there for show? To provide a mirage of democracy?
The relevant segment is about 50 minutes into the video, I think.
As for competing with China, I have a suggestion that might shock the Washington foreign policy establishment: study harder. Be cleverer than them. Be more innovative than them. Then create stuff that the rest of the world wants to buy. That is what genuine competition is, unlike Washington's eternal foreign policy of "Let's kill everyone and steal all their stuff".