At first I was pleased that Trump (as much as I
dislike him) at Tuesday’s presidential debate refused to call for a victory for
Ukraine over Russia. But upon thinking through what both candidates stand for,
I realize that both are war mongers but in different suits.
The Biden administration is standing aside while
Ukraine pushes into Russian territory. Kamala Harris is on board with this. Now,
Washington is floating the idea of deep strikes into Russia. Not only does that
move us to the edge of a nuclear confrontation, but it also invites Russia to escalate
air attacks on Ukraine with devastating consequences for civilians. The Biden
administration and Zelensky could care less. Unless Kamala Harris disassociates
herself from these policies, she is as much responsible as Biden for the waste
of U.S. tax dollars and for the suffering that the war has caused. Biden hasn’t
raised a finger to support a negotiated solution which sooner or later is going
to happen. The real strategy behind Biden’s policy is to weaken Russia
militarily and Putin politically and to isolate Russia from the rest of Europe.
These goals come at an immense price both economically and on human lives.
Trump calls for a resolution to the conflict but his
roadmap is to assert U.S. authority. We’re the bully on the block and all sides
have to listen to us. But what would happen if they don’t? What would happen if
a negotiated solution that Washington proposes is turned down by Moscow? As the
strong-man, a President Trump would end up threatening Moscow, since otherwise
we would look weak. But what would happen if Moscow didn’t step down? This is
brinkmanship, a dangerous game, and it’s brinkmanship that underpins Trump’s
foreign policy. This is exactly why my vote goes to Jill Stein.
