The Ukrainian president is the one "fighting to the last Ukrainian". After he has achieved the final annihilation of his fellow citizens and everything they have, he will slither away with his billions, a 'hero', sought after by publishers and as an after dinner speaker. There will be no "victory against Russia". There will be no victory for ordinary Ukrainians - those actually left alive, without homes or anything that they ever owned blown to bits.

Would their lives have been worse than they are now if their maniacal president had come to some arrangement with Russia rather than bringing down on them the results of his 'little big man' complex?

"As the bloody conflict in Ukraine continues, the rhetoric from the imperial spear-holders in Washington and some allies is becoming increasingly fixated with one object: victory against Russia."

This was the aim before the war even started you fool.

Overthrow the country
+ Empower the Nazis
+ Pick a fight with Russian speaking people by outlawing their language
+ Continually poke the Russian bear until you get a war going
And maybe also
+ Create a global energy crisis
+ Planned global economic collapse
+ Global pandemic

This Anglo or US centric analysis requires one to bypass the facts and interests of people, through Central Eastern Europe, on the ground with lived experience of Putin-Russia, and their independence?

Like the author, another contributor to US Counter Punch, describes Putin worshippers round Kremlin backed 'The Grayzone' (pro Assad conspiracies round 'white helmets' in Syria), masquerading as journalists of the left, as 's-heads' and 'fake anti-imperialists' concurring with Trumpists, Fox News, alt right etc.

Then you have Kissinger and Chomsky jointly agreeing that it's not Putin-Russia's fault that they invaded Ukraine.....

I can only assume that the Russians are getting an unexpected flogging.

This Article is the silliest that I have seen from this Author so
far .

What the article, and the comments in the Forum, FAIL to mention is that Ukraine is fully entitled to its secure borders as negotiated through the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances in 1994. As a signatory to the Memorandum, Russia AGREED to the borders of Ukraine to include the Donbas and Luhansk territory, as well as the region of Crimea usurped illegally by Russia in 2014.

The MINIMUM requirement to end this war is for Russia to vacate its absurd and unjustified territorial claims to regions of Ukraine which they acknowledged in 1994 trough the signed memorandum. Furthermore, Putin must withdraw all Russian invading forces out of Ukrainian territory and agree to substantial post-war reparations.

I don't agree with the anti- USA rhetoric of this Author. If Russia/Putin prevails in the Ukraine? Then she/he will want more and more, until there is a new Soviet Union! And who knows if it ends there?

We must continue to support Ukraine with everything at our disposal, least we become the next target for this limitless expansion, and occupied slavey?
Alan B.

Yuri, nails it in one! Hear, hear and well said, Yuri!
Alan B.

it seems too much of a coincidence, that as soon as Afghanistan and Syria fighting has stopped , the worlds two biggest arms dealers start another conflict, that is the Ukraine.

The conflict should have been over in a month, but Russia keeps sending small numbers of troops, and American, UK and Australia keep supplying the Ukraine with armed equipment all paid by the world bank.

Will this be another 10 year war? or will another conflict start elsewhere in which the US and their allies and Russia and China can sell their guns and bombs. All funded by the UN (world bank)

"Entitled to secure borders"

Entitlements are like rights: you have them until someone more powerful takes them off you.

Binoy views all foreign policy issues through the lens of a reflexive anti-Americanism (seriously, who else when writing about the Ukraine war would use the phrase “war criminal” only in relation to Henry Kissinger?). In doing this, he virtually ignores Russia’s role in starting the war and the necessity of Russian co-operation if, as he proposes, the solution is a negotiated compromise settlement. As Putin shows no sign whatever of being willing to do this at present, it would make no sense for Ukraine or its Western supporters to be signalling in advance of negotiations the concessions it would be willing to make. That would be a dumb negotiating tactic.

And, as the article he links to by Max Hastings explores much more intelligently, in war things don’t always work out as even smart and well-informed experts expect. Early on in the conflict many in the “ultra-realist” camp expected a swift and comprehensive Russian victory. They were wrong, and their credibility has suffered as a result. Even if a negotiated split of territory is the most likely outcome, there is still room to hope for, and work for, a comprehensive victory by the Ukraine; and to fear one by Russia.

There were no two sides that initiated this conflict, just an unprovoked attack by Russia on the sovereign territory of another!

That unprovoked attack not changed by the mistruths by the disingenuous revision of pro-Russian BS artists like AC and the couldn't lie straight in bed or a coffin, Author!

Have to use a corkscrew to get him in the latter, he's so twisted!

Yuri, called it and correctly so! No ifs buts or maybes!
Alan B.

It is a BLATANT BIG LIE endlessly repeated so many people now believe and defend that this war was provoked by the Russians. In fact, they only took action after a lot of provocations by US backed interests that were the main cause. The US want to stop any possible challenges to themselves as world superpower. For start, when communism collapsed in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, NATO should have been disbanded as the Warsaw Pact it existed to counter disappeared. However, Yanks instead broke promises to Russian Federation not to expand it eastward and has been using what has effectively become the North American Terrorist Organisation to keep the US in Europe, Russia out and Germany down. Yanks would like Ukraine in NATO, which would allow them to station Nuclear weapons much closer to Moscow. Russians regard this as unacceptable as Yanks did of Russians proposing to have them in Cuba in the "missile crisis" of 1962. Then Yanks sponsored a coup in Kiev in 2014 to replace the democratically elected government with puppets and stooges more obedient to Washington. With the largely Russian speaking Russian people of Eastern Ukraine getting treated worse by before, this resulted in action by them for independence. Quick Russian military action stopped US Navy sending in force to take over Crimea without a shot being fired. Since then, people of Donetsk and Lugansk regions have been resisting complete military takeover of their regions by the government in Kiev, which has effectively treated them as subhuman. Re the Minsk peace accords sponsored by France and Germany. former Ukrainian President Poroshenko now openly admits these agreements which they did not observe were just to buy time for a military buildup. Then when it became apparent that a full scale blitzkrieg type attack on Donetsk and Lugansk was imminent their Presidents ASKED Russia for military help. The Russian parliament then recognised these governments and authorised Vladimir Putin to initiate action.

I concur with the thrust of this article - all parties should head to the negotiation table.

Only someone who remains ignorant of the many real life provocations could ever believe that Russia's military action in Ukraine is 'unprovoked'. Mox has given an excellent summary of the major provocations which have led to Russia’s current actions.

Perhaps those who cling onto the myth of an ‘unprovoked invasion’ could explain the breaking of NATO's promise in 1889 that it would never expand eastward. Or The US-backed Colour Revolution in Ukraine in 2004. Or the US-initiated coup in Ukraine in 2014. Or Ukraine's total disregard for the Minsk Agreements signed in 2014 and 2015. Or the US withdrawal from nuclear missile treaties so NATO could surround Russia with medium range missiles. Or Ukraine's constant shelling of the Donbas between 2014 and 2022 and its intensified bombardment on the 16th February 2022.

These are just some of the many ways the US has attempted to contain and provoke Russia. The US always has to have an enemy so its defence department and armaments industry can continue to prop up its ailing economy. While Gorbachev and Reagan were ending the Cold War, the war hawks were busy reestablishing Russia as the enemy. The demonisation and provocation has never ended. Putin has tried to negotiate in good faith with the US for over two decades. His military action now is the last response to a long line of arrogant and unnecessary US provocation.

Why do old left and right of the Anglosphere, in far away places, agree on Russia being a victim while ignoring the interests, rights and lives of 250 million citizens of Northern, Baltic, Central Eastern Europe, Turkey, Caucasus, Ukraine and Russia?

There is far superior research, analysis and journalism, both on the ground and geopolitical, coming out of the latter nations and regions, under duress, versus the opinions of ageing ideologues in the Anglosphere?

Mox and Bronwyn,

The problem that you face is trying to explain how Ukraine who never made an attack on Russian soil provoked Russia into launching a full scale invasion. The "provocation" boils down to Russia considering Ukraine to be vasal state of Russia that had the nerve to cast off its shackles.

The reality is that no one seriously believes a word from Russia, and Russia's baseless agression has destroyed any remnants of good will from the west. Russia's retaliation to the sanctions such stealing leased planes etc have not only made it a political but a financial pariah as well. When the EU weans itself off Russian gas and oil, secondary sanctions will be applied to India and China and Russia will be truely screwed as no one will want to buy or sell to Russia for decades.

Russia cannot sell arms to the world primarily because it cannot produce even enough to replace the arms being easily destroyed by Ukraine. The US, UK, France etc are happily taking their market share, and using Ukraine to demonstrate their superiority.

Russia is becoming exhausted and over the last few weeks its attacks have become feeble.