Russia has invaded Ukraine, after much of the West dismissing any possibility of such an action by the Russians. Eastern Europe is at War. The peaceniks are out at the behest of the US. There can be no dispute about the disagreeability of war. But beyond idealism, it is a fact that Nations do go to war. Including the skirmishes and civil wars of the 18th and 19th Century, against the natives and federations to build a Union, America has gone into around 102 wars in the continent and around the world.
In the late 20th Century, the US had gone to war in Vietnam (1955 -1975), in Laos (1953-1975), In Cuba, in Lebanon, in Libya, Panama, Gulf and Iraq. In the 21st Century, the US went into Afghanistan to avenge the 9/11 Terror Attack by Saudi National Osama Bin Laden who was eventually located and killed in Pakistan. Both Saudi and Pakistan remained American allies all these years. Iraq war simultaneously happened between 2003 and 2011 and left Iraq with a power vacuum replaced by ISIS, much like Afghanistan was recently vacated, leaving the war-ravaged country to the mercy of the dreaded Taliban.
President Barack Obama, who was awarded Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, barely Eight months in office, authorised Air Strikes in at least seven countries. In his Nobel acceptance speech, Obama said there are circumstances when war is justified, mirroring John Stuart Mill’s famous quote from his book ‘Principles of Political Economy’ where he wrote:
‘War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest thing: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war is much worse… A war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice- is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertion of better men than himself.’
Though it may be a matter of dispute that for the United States of America which views itself as a benign hegemony, and oftentimes appear to believe in the idea of bombing sovereign nations to democracy, how many of the numerous wars they went into in foreign lands on grounds as flimsy as fictional Weapons of Mass Destruction, would qualify the test of reasonability on the benchmark of John Stuart Mill. Even the claim of supporting democracy would appear to be flimsy when the history of US support to the despots and dictators across the world is viewed impartially, littered with death and destruction from Bangladesh to Libya to Iraq.
The founding Fathers of the United States were just men and had decent ideals. Most of the wars they fought were within the continent and were existential wars necessary for the survival of the newly-found nation. Looking around at the greed of Colonialist forces, they felt the need was to be protective about their ideas but at the same time they took pains to avoid attempting to be the guardian of the Globe.
US president James Monroe went on to sign an agreement with the UK in 1823, which was supported and approved of by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Secretary of State under him, John Quincy Adams, a well-read and well-travelled man, who incidentally also led the team of American Negotiators signing Treaty of Ghent after the War of 1812 with the British, urged him to turn this agreement into a US policy document to guide the American leadership in the following centuries. The Monroe Doctrine signed on December 2nd 1823 envisaged that the US will not interfere in the matters of Europe, will not interfere in the matters of existing European Colonies and the West will not invade American Continent or establish newer colonies.
The idea of respect for not only American Sovereignty rather that of other nations was inherent in this policy. The document not only thwarted the attempt of the UK to continue to meddle in the affairs of Latin American nations, it for the first time split the world into well-defined spheres of influence. However, in 1904 a corollary known as Roosevelt Corollary was added to the Doctrine which allowed the US to intervene in the matters of Latin American nations (still, in the close vicinity of the US, which had a possibility of impacting the general peace and tranquillity in the US), in the cases of what was termed as flagrant and Chronic wrongdoings (by the rulers of those nations in American Continent).
Those were still the times of principled politics. Things unravelled quickly post World War II as businesses rose to make huge profits out of the miseries of the wars. Still, the policy held good for the Americans when the Soviets planted their Missiles in Cuba. The policy was invoked to demand the removal of the Missiles from what was defined under the Doctrine as Cuba fell under a Sphere of American influence. Within one week or so, the Missiles were removed and the policy stood good in holding up global peace.
As the US grew stronger, protected by its Geographical position, away from any direct territorial threats, the doctrine was pushed backwards by the Americans themselves as they started using US soft-power to reach out to remote nations, trying to impose American values, and more importantly trying to plant pliable autocrats in those countries. Money flowed in to create public opinion and movements and campaigns from the Arab Spring to Otpor (The Resistance) in Belgrade to Khmara in Georgia and Pora (It is high time) in Ukraine.
The problem with federal structures built over the idea of parochial isolationism and separatism is that they break quickly. The founders of the Indian republic in 1950 realised this and in spite of huge support of the Russian model of the USSR, they stopped short of calling India an amalgamation of independent states. Contrary to what Rahu Gandhi recently proposed, Dr Ambedkar called for a heavy union that could hold the states together. Their pragmatism becomes more and more clear as we see the fragility of the Russian Federation which resulted in the breaking up of a historically huge nation the moment the iron hand was lifted from over its head.
The West went back happy as Russia broke, ignoring the common history and cultural bonds across the new splinter nations they created. Ukraine which became an independent nation and also turned into an arms supplier to rogue nations like Pakistan, still had Russian-speaking people inside. Incidentally, Ukraine signed an 85 Million Dollars Tank deal for the supply of T-80 UD Tanks to Pakistan in 2021 while Pakistan was already placed under the FATF grey list for terrorist connections in 2018. The West, not satisfied by the breaking up of Russia, went further step by step.
They wanted the pull-out Ukraine and make it a part of the West. Ukraine was always looked up to by Russia as a kind of buffer state between Russia and the West, more so after the disintegration of the USSR, closer to them than the West. Much as the US was alarmed when the Soviets placed Missiles in Cuba in 1962, Russians were alarmed when in 2008 US, in a unilateral fashion proposed Membership Action Plan to bring Ukraine under NATO. Some say even the French and the Germans weren’t on board when Bush made that statement.
This 2008 MAP came about quickly after the 2004-2005 Orange Revolution behind which many say the US and George Soros’ Open Society Foundation were active. The elected Ukraine Government in 2013 refused to join the European Union. In Feb 2014 another movement was started called Euromaidan Clashes (Revolution for Dignity). This violent movement ended with the death of 130 people and around two dozen policemen. Arseniy Yatsenyuk was designated as the interim PM of Ukraine. A recording of a telephonic discussion which happened on January 28th, 2014 between American Diplomat Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt went viral on YouTube regarding their discussions on who to be made the Prime Minister of Ukraine.
Yatsenyuk was sworn into power on 27th February 2014 replacing Viktor Yanukovych. It is somewhat similar to China deputing the head of state in Nepal and then making the interim head sign agreement to join the Chinese confederation. The first thing, this US-appointed PM did was to sign the agreement to join the EU. Going by the legendary Russian Spy network and his own KGB background, one can be sure that the Russian Premier Vladimir Putin must have got more inputs than the viral YouTube video confirming US play in setting up a puppet Government aimed to bring Ukraine into the West and thereby bringing the West to the door of Russia. It is said that Russia offered a package of 15 Billion USD to prevent Ukraine from joining the West.
Petra Poroshenko was then elected the President of Ukraine and brought in what was termed Lustration or Purge. Under this, more than a thousand Government Officials and holders of public offices were replaced. The appointees opposed Russian as a second language (remember the replacement of Bangla and Punjabi by Urdu in Pakistan). America’s overt and covert intent was to wipe off any historical and cultural connection Ukraine might be having with Russia. While Russia was riling with the pain of multiple partitions after the fall of the Soviet Union, the emboldened the US went all out to pull Ukraine into its sphere of influence. Russia, even after being severely weakened, still holds very strong military assets, in many aspects, equal and more than American resources say tanks and weapons. Russia and America have almost an equal number of Nuclear Weapons (Russian 6800 to American 6100) and the same number of deployed warheads.
India, in terms of political ideology, is closer to the US than to the Russians. However, the history of India, post-independence, draws a parallel closer to the Russians, particularly the post-collapse of the USSR than the Americans. India has too been through the pain of partition with manufactured divisions promoted by the West, with an aim of eventual Balkanisation. Russia has stood with India across most of the crucial times that India had faced post-Independence, while American support has been largely limited to ambiguous rhetoric mostly similar to the Indian statement on the Ukraine invasion, but often worse.
During most of the wars between India and Pakistan, it was Pakistan that the US sided with. In 1971, as the US sat over massacre and genocide in East Pakistan, not wanting to upset the Pakistanis; when India stepped in, the US was quick to move Naval Fleet to contain India. China, except for brief schooling during Trump’s era, has been considered by the US as its ally in spite of the Global territorial ambitions of China which have milked the US economy dry in the last century. After Indian Nuclear Tests under the Vajpayee Government, the US had placed sanctions on India. It is truly surprising that the elite Nuclear power club which has often been most irresponsible in the Global Nuclear arena have tried to stop the nation which has always stood up for its moral uprightness from having a nuclear defence while facing hostilities from neighbouring nations. Forget wanting to rule over Bangladesh directly or through a proxy, India did not even liberate the Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir using a comprehensive military victory and allowed the wound to fester.
When India removed Article 370 of special provision from Kashmir, legally part of India through a voluntary merger of the State in 1947, the US organised Senate hearings and encouraged media reports which attempted to depict India as an invader. When India tried to bring in Citizenship Amendment Act to give shelter to persecuted non-Muslims in erstwhile Indian areas which have turned into Islamist theocratic states post-partition, the US opposed it, not officially but through media propaganda. The same US which celebrated Biden for taking oath as the President over Bible did not hesitate to let loose its media over the fictional Hindu nationalist government of India.
Ukraine has over the year following the US and West on Nuclear Tests, CAA, Kashmir and all the contentious issues that India has faced. It had also opposed India in UNSC in favour of Pakistan. It is really odd that the Policymakers and thinkers from the West, totally ignore their duplicity and are preaching India to support Ukraine when NATO in all its reality has already dumped them for all practical purposes after propping them against the Russians.
India is not a Communist nation but America has never valued it when India fought a lonely battle against the ever-encroaching Communist China at one hand and an Islamist Pakistan at the other. America which went to war in Afghanistan over 9/11, asked India to exercise restrained over 26/11. The way Joe Biden pursued the Vaccine policy blocking the vaccines and even blocking the raw material for the vaccines being manufactured in India, has not earned any points on morality for the US as a torch-bearer of global humanity.
It is not a time for India to rethink its policies. It is time for Americans to rethink their policies. Ukraine is a reminder that they have strayed far away from the nation that their founders wanted to build under the influence of Leftist policies. The reaction from the Indian masses, apart from the Indian government, should give US policymakers something to think about. Having faced loss of territories under the influence of Global Islam and Global Communism, India feels the significance of cultural and historical ties which binds a nation together. India has long fought and felt the pain of efforts of foreign forces to bring in the Balkanisation and irrespective of political sympathies, India has watched the fall of the USSR in horror and the rise of Islamist fundamentalism under the support of the West in the name of woke liberalism. We are moving towards a world of equals and colonisers of the past must understand this.
Kipling’s white man’s burden will only aggravate things for the Americans. As the world’s oldest democracy, for once, the US should learn from India, instead of trying to teach her. The West needs to pull back their media house and quasi-foreign policy bodies like Freedom House and USCIRF to humiliate, demolish and crush the native faiths in foreign lands. Ukraine has lessons for everyone and the world would be a better place if we are willing to learn. The US must return to its roots and they may be able to save their already fragile reputations. It is not the independence of Ukraine that is at stake. That was taken away by the US and the West long ago. It is their own moral stature that is at stake. From Thomas Jefferson’s idealist -‘Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations…entangling alliances with none’ to Kissinger’s mercenary- ‘America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests’ – the US has come far away.