Will Joe Biden’s “Greedy Tracks” in Ukraine Derail Presidential Bid?
Americans hear a lot about the conflict in Ukraine from various sources, but most know little about what it is. For all intents and purposes, they see [at best] it as a proxy war with Russia, but that is because they don’t hear from people on the front line.
However, they are likely to hear more now that Joe Biden is running for president. He is well entrenched in Ukrainian political-economic affairs, to be kind—or better said, he is wanting to participate in a feeding frenzy.
Much of what has transpired on his watch is already open sourced, such as the dealings between his son, Hunter and corrupted minions in Ukraine. In the final year of the Obama presidency, Vice President Joe Biden “threatened to withhold $1 billion in United States loan guarantees if Ukraine’s leaders did not dismiss the country’s top prosecutor”—Viktor Shokin—“who had been accused of turning a blind eye to corruption in his own office and among the political elite.”
Hunter was then getting paid as much as $50,000 to sit on the board of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company that was in Shokin’s sights. The question the New York Times raises, (but does not provide an answer for), is: “were Joe’s and Hunter’s overlapping interests in Ukraine coincidental, or corrupt?”
As reported by the NYT, the renewed interest in Hunter Biden’s dealings in Ukraine is being fanned by allies of Mr. Trump. They have been eager to publicize and even encourage the investigation, as well as other Ukrainian inquiries that serve Mr. Trump’s political ends, underscoring the Trump campaign’s concern about the electoral threat from the former vice president’s campaign.
That will definitely be an issue for the Democratic nomination race to deal with. Legal or not, Hunter Biden’s decision to become a director for Burisma presented a serious conflict of interest. But it can have a peace dividend, as it helps many to understand what has happened in Ukraine—especially the motivations.
In the meantime, quoting the work of Stephen Cohen, it is only too clear that we now have a new Cold War, and the frontline is Ukraine – right on Russia’s borders. The blame for this must be shared between Washington and its Nazi proxies in Kiev. Just take notice of the comments of US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, which are still fresh in the minds of EU leaders and the many victims in Ukraine.
Realities vs. Sound Bytes
My sources in Ukraine, soldiers fighting on both sides, one French and one American, tell me that they have recently seen more military street funerals than usual, so that is perhaps a better indication of the current situation and likely future one than what the BBC, CNN or MSM are willing to tell.
One lives in the so called “Bandera fiefdom,” Ukraine proper, the so-called “nest of pro-Nazis” as Russian politicians claim from time to time. “So we are well-protected and sheltered from the nastiness of the eastern confrontation thanks to NATO supporters,” he says. Jean Claude prefers the official storyline spouted there to what we know is the truth.
The other, an American from Texas, does not share this view. He made his position rather clear in an interview last year. The People’s Army of Donbass is fighting the West and Kiev at the front. “The Russian-hating fascistic junta which seized power in Kiev, and is terrorising the people under the command of NATO and criminals it has imported from other countries where it did the same, will not be satisfied until Ukraine is destroyed and much of the region, including Europe, destabilised.”
The Ukrainians and US Nazis are now desperate, they will escalate in Donbass. I thought if they did not attack before or during FIFA we would be safe. This is not the case. Provocations continue to escalate. A friend in Yasynuvata said, “During FIFA, the Ukrainians only shelled at night. After Trump/Putin meet, they shell morning, day and night.”
There is more than enough evidence that saving the world from financial driven Western expansion and a resurgence of Nazism are just causes. Just consider the events of 2014 and what all transpired in Ukraine by the hands of the West. Now the conflict is heating up again, especially in light of US moves in the region, and of US intentions towards Iran
And with the 250 million for American arms to the Nazis, it now gets complicated. The US Government’s support of actual Nazis in Ukraine began under the Obama and now continues with Trump. That indicates that there is no difference between the two dominant American political parties when it comes to foreign policy.
That is a lot of money, as recently announced, even if much of it gets siphoned off by backhanders. Supposedly the American military assistance will increase the defensive capacity and survivability of Ukraine’s Land and Special Operations Forces through the provision of sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and counter-artillery radars; command and control; electronic warfare detection and secure communications; military mobility; night vision; and, military medical treatment.
This sounds offensive – and is looking to be more than a US operation in the making, and more than just MORE of the typical NATO rhetoric that goes with the territory and the redundant security organization looking for job security, it has to come up with evil ways to justify its continued existence.
And all the while detractors and spin doctors want to lay the blame on Russia for what all has transpired in Ukraine and blames those closest to the Kremlin for getting rich, and without proof. But the same can be said of Joe Biden, and before him the Clinton Foundation and the associated minions of the corrupt—and with more than ample evidence.
War is all about money and a great racket, as we know only too well from WAR IS A RACKET by Maj. Gen. Smedley D. Butler, UNMC.
NATO at the Gates
Few can argue that NATO is not the organisation it once was, and thus its role should be “readjusted to address terrorism or giving parades.” But interestingly, only when Trump mentioned that NATO needed to change its mission, in his first bid for the White House, was there any response to this suggestion.
Trump is first credited with calling NATO’s value into question during an interview with The Washington Post’s editorial board, in which he reportedly said that NATO “as a concept is good, but it is not as good as it was when it first evolved,” and it is only from this point onwards that there has been serious debate on what NATO is supposed to be doing in the post-Cold War world.
NATO’s role is being dictated by how many Western weapons can be sold in the name of NATO expansion. Not only is this not what NATO is supposed to be for, it is this imperative which has created the debacles in Libya, Afghanistan and Ukraine, as confirmed by the hacked emails from NATO General Breedlove. However, Breedlove’s aggressive efforts to persuade the US to go beyond a proxy war in Ukraine come as no surprise when we consider the backgrounds of those he was plotting with.
Whether it is Trump or an opponent who wins in the upcoming presidential race, it is certain that this discussion is long overdue, and today’s political and security realities, including the sources of terrorism, need closer attention. It is clear that NATO’s mission should be to deal with terrorism rather than to be a direct instrument of an aggressive US foreign policy, especially in places it could set up the War to End All Likes, as will always be the case when the US contributes the lion’s share of its funding.
Americans have been conditioned to believe by CNN and the MSM that if you give your hand to the Russian bear, tomorrow he snatches the body of an Eastern European nation, which Americans care little about. However, the truth shows that peace and paranoia are good for business.
Informed Americans don’t even like NATO, and are tired of the mess it has created in many countries. They agree with Trump that it is obsolete and needs rebranding, with a real mission. They think Europe should be paying for its own security. Trump is playing this tune as well by moving US troops to Poland to force NATO members, especially Germany, to pay more of its fair share, at least 2 per cent of it GNP.
Now the attention of the US election is based on the interface and respect between Trump and Putin, and what dealings Trump has had with Russia, besides a beauty pageant there and selling off some Florida real estate for big profits to New Russians.
But if Russia uses the threat of aggression, real or perceived, towards Europe, those in the US Military Industrial Complex (remember Eisenhower’s speech), will view this as a chance to ramp up Pentagon spending, gain some votes, and at the end of the day get a BIGGER payday from weapon sales.
Before NATO destroys a country, as it did Libya under the guise of UN Resolution 1973, it should have a plan to rebuild it rather than leave it for terrorists to take over. Now in the run-up to US presidential elections the US should not be taking sides in a local “cock fight,” – and not out of any moral obligation, or sense of doing the right thing to bring stability to the very country it destabilised.
NATO is a left over from the Cold War, and as an entity with a mind and agenda of its own, “self-preservation,” it should have been ended or mothballed with the fall of the Warsaw Pact or Russia. If not, Russia and former East Bloc Countries should have been allowed to join.
It is becoming clear that foreign policy matters in a US presidential election when it can be used to derail the campaign of the likes of Joe Biden. It has been nice listening to your plagiarized speeches, but better you stick with the family business, even the one in faraway lands, so take the money and run. However, the world is a bit wiser as to what has transpired in Ukraine—and even if he would win, how the same aggressive programme will continue.
It is going to get interesting
Rudy Giuliani, President Trump’s personal attorney, said on “Hannity” on Tuesday that former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s dealings in Ukraine represent “a case that is crying out to be investigated,” adding, “If it doesn’t get investigated, we just don’t have equal justice in this country.”
Giuliani said last week that he would travel to Ukraine’s capital city, Kiev, to urge the government to investigate the origins of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s recently concluded probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, and the involvement of Hunter Biden in a gas company owned by a Ukrainian oligarch with [alleged] Kremlin ties.
It is interesting that the Washington Post is weighing in on the allegations, and why the alleged Joe Biden ‘Ukraine conspiracy’ doesn’t hold up. Other anti-Trump papers are following suit. One only has to consider the sources, and their less than neutral position on Trump and his administration.
“What is good for the goose is good for the gander” and now is payback time for Trump and his supporters. As Trump’s personal lawyer, Giuliani, tweeted, “Biden conflicts are too apparent to be ignored and should be investigated quickly and expeditiously. “How deep and how high did the alleged Ukraine conspiracy go?” he asked, in language willfully reminiscent of that used against his boss during that other investigation.
But what about Donald Trump and his obvious motivations about Ukraine? Let’s not forget that he is a businessman—and War is a Racket.
Henry Kamens, columnist, expert on Central Asia and Caucasus, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.