Mediaboss Marketing

Alexander Serdyuk has stopped talking to his mother. He is nervously watching war edge ever closer to his home in Lviv. She is 1,500 miles (2,400km) to the east in Russia, denying that any of it is actually happening.

I cant speak with her, says the 34-year-old Russian who moved to Ukraine 10 years ago. She doesnt understand me. She says its just Nazis killing each other, and that we are responsible for all this.

She just doesnt believe me, he adds. We used to speak with each other a lot, but now theres just no point.

Its the same for Natasha Henova. She has already fled her home near Kharkiv with her young sons and husband, as the bombs crept ever closer to their village. When she called a cousin who lives near Moscow to update her, however, the conversation was almost as upsetting as the war itself.

She is sympathetic but says that we are being lied to, says Henova, a 35-year-old English language tutor. She says its all Americas doing. I say OK, but why are Russians hitting us if its all about America? She says Ukrainians have been so cruel to people in the Donbas.

She said Ukrainian soldiers must surrender. She even invited me to come to Russia to be with her. I didnt know whether to laugh or cry. Im desperately struggling here to keep Ukraine independent and she invites me to go to Russia.

As Russias war in Ukraine enters its fourth week, an information war between people on both sides of the border is intensifying. The military onslaught is not just demolishing residential buildings and city centres in Ukraine; it is sorely testing myriad familial cross-border ties that have endured for decades, centuries even.

While people in Ukraine can see with their own eyes what is happening to their country, people in Russia do so only through the house of mirrors that is state television, and when those cowering in bunkers send videos and messages about their plight, many (but not all) of the recipients simply dismiss it as fake news.

Natalia Ivanivna has Russian parents and grandparents, so when the 62-year-old accountant had to flee Kharkiv earlier this month for a village in western Ukraine, there were plenty of relatives whom she wanted to alert. Fifteen minutes after the shelling started, I sent them a series of messages: We are being bombed. The first question they asked me: Who is doing the bombing our army or yours?

Ivanivna says she believes it is fear as much as ignorance that shapes the worldview across the border. I think they are scared of Putins regime, as much as my parents were scared of Stalins. Now they just dont reply. I dont have anger towards them; I just feel sorry for them.

So pervasive and persuasive is Russian television, that even some people in eastern Ukraine who watch it were taken in by its version of events.

Maria Kryvosheyeva, who fled Kharkiv with her two children, has a grandmother who stayed behind, too frail to travel. She used to only watch Russian television, Kryvosheyeva says, and when the war started I noticed she was very calm. She was like, Dont worry. Putin said everything is OK.

She changed her tune when Russian forces started bombing Kharkiv. We turned over to Ukrainian television, which was showing everything, all the destroyed buildings. But Russian TV was showing webcam videos from days earlier and was telling people that everything was normal in Kharkiv. My grandmother started to cry. She said: I cant believe Ive been brainwashed all these years.

About half of Ukrainians more than 20 million people have family in Russia, according to a 2011 survey which also found that a third of Ukrainians had friends or acquaintances there. Familial interchange between the two countries has been prolific for centuries, from the early days of empire in the 17th century, through the late Soviet period and into the age of independence, says Orysia Lutsevych, a research fellow at Chatham House.

Remember, Moscow was always the metropolis of the empire, she says, explaining why so many Ukrainians moved east over the past 300-plus years. It was an attractive place for people who wanted to make a career. The similarity of the language meant it was easy to go and study there. The best institutes were there, so it was very prestigious to go.

Russians and Ukrainians living in other countries also feel infuriated with the denialism that seems to have infected their relatives. The kind of things they hear include: the war footage is fake; Nazis are running amok; Ukrainians should stay indoors or the fascists will get them.

Natasha, a UK-based Russian who didnt want her surname published, has a Ukrainian father and Russian mother who both now live in western Siberia. Her fathers family are from Vinnytsia, in Ukraine, however, and some of them have already fled to Poland. Natasha asked her dad if hed spoken to his brother. Her father said yes and that everything was fine though he couldnt hear much through the air raid sirens.

I said to him, How can everything be fine if there are air raid sirens? How is that OK?

She says her mother parrots Russian television, about the suffering of Russian people in eastern Ukraine and the need to protect them.

But this sounds mad to me, Natasha says, because my family is Russian-speaking and they are fleeing to Poland.

When I ask my mother if shes seen the images, the footage, and whats happening in the cities, she says they are all fake, Natasha adds. Its so frustrating not to be able to have this conversation. Im really disappointed that she believes the president instead of me.

Some of this might be generational. Natasha says the older generation grew up through the Soviet period believing that the west was against them, that the only people they could trust were their own leadership. She says there is a deep Russian sense of being the greatest nation on Earth, with the richest resources, a survivor race that can get through anything. Of course they are going to believe what they have been told.

Forgiveness may take a long time. Lutsevych says there is a very strong sense of we will not forget in Ukraine, a determination that when the bombs have stopped falling, war crimes must be punished and people held accountable. She says it will probably take a truth and reconciliation process similar to what happened in South Africa after apartheid for families to be able to speak to each other again.

Artur Kolomiitsev, a 28-year-old photographer sticking it out in Kharkiv, is not sure he can forgive. His parents in Russia are understanding, he says, but his aunts, uncles, cousins and grandmother less so.

They dont believe this war is real. They believe we are bombing ourselves and that our government is on drugs, he says. If one day I were to send them a picture of a missile hitting me in the head, maybe only then would they believe me. I dont want to see them any more. I dont want to talk to them any more. I will never forgive them.

Despite losing job, home and peace of mind, Natasha Henova doesnt want to lose touch with her younger cousin, who was clearly also a close friend through their formative years.

Maybe when its all over, maybe in a few years, if my family stays alive, maybe Ill be able to forgive her and understand her.

Read more here:
They dont believe its real: how war has split Ukrainian-Russian families - The Guardian

Russia announced on Thursday that it would not hold a vote on its resolution calling for a "negotiated ceasefire" to evacuate civilians, after other world leaders condemned the scope and language of the proposal. Russia's resolution did not mention stopping its attack on Ukraine, and did not respond to the General Assembly resolution that overwhelmingly called for Russian forces to withdraw.

The U.S., U.K., France, and other nations had all spoken out against Russia's resolution, with Albania's ambassador calling it a "mockery" on Thursday.

Instead, Russia's Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said at an emergency United Nations Security Council meeting that Russia would have a meeting of the Council on Friday to discuss what he said was "new evidence" of U.S.-supported biological and chemical laboratories in Ukraine. The U.S. has flatly denied those allegations, and has warned the rhetoric could signal that Russia plans to use those types of weapons in Ukraine.

Biden's U.N. envoy, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, celebrated the decision not to vote on what she called a "farcical humanitarian resolution which was doomed to fail." But Thomas-Greenfield said Russia's decision to pull the vote says nothing about its commitment to ending the humanitarian crisis.

"We know if Russia really truly cared about humanitarian crises, the one that it created, it could simply stop its attacks on the people of Ukraine," she said. "But instead, they want to call for another Security Council meeting to use this Council as a venue for its disinformation and for promoting its propaganda."

Albania's Ambassador Ferit Hoxha said that during the Friday meeting, he expects "Russia will try to make its narrative, we'll try to establish facts."

When asked by CBS News if he thought the meeting would be a pretext for Russia using chemical weapons, Hoxha replied, "I hope not. But that is the fear."

The Russian ambassador's remarks came after U.N. agencies and the U.S. shared gripping accounts of what several Council members called "war crimes" that intentionally targeted civilians.

Thomas-Greenfield pledged that "Russia will be held accountable for its atrocities."

"There is only one way one way to end this madness," Thomas-Greenfield said. "President Putin: Stop the killings. Withdraw your forces. Leave Ukraine once and for all."

At the meeting, Thomas-Greenfield recounted reports of a mass grave in the southern port city of Mariupol, which she described as "a narrow trench filled with the bodies of children."

On Monday, aerial video showed the once-thriving city in ruins, with charred remains of buildings and reports of more than 2,000 civilians killed.

Thomas-Greenfield condemned Russia's weeks-long offensive, telling diplomats that "Ukraine will never be a victory for Putin no matter what advances he makes, no matter whom he kills or what cities he destroys."

On Wednesday, Ukrainian officials accused Russia of striking and completely annihilating a theater in Mariupol, marked with the word "children" in large Russian writing, where "hundreds" of civilians were sheltering. There is hope that many of those in the theater's bomb shelter survived.

Russia's ambassador to the U.N. denied that Russia was responsible for the theater attack at the Thursday meeting.

China's U.N. Ambassador Zhang Jun called for a re-upping of support for a diplomatic solution, but made it clear that China is opposed to the sanctions that the U.S. and Europe have placed on the Russian Federation and on Russian nationals, warning that sanctions can spark "new humanitarian consequences."

"Given the sluggish recovery in the global economy, ever-escalating sanctions are undermining the stability of the international industrial chain and supply chain, thus exacerbating food and energy crises, damaging people's livelihood in all countries, developing countries in particular, and triggering new humanitarian consequences," Zhang said.

But despite widespread hope for a diplomatic solution, U.N. officials said civilians are still being attacked and aid deliveries are being blocked.

"Daily attacks continue to batter Ukrainian cities. Many are reportedly indiscriminate, resulting in civilian casualties," Undersecretary-General Rosemary DiCarlo told the Council. DiCarlo said the U.N. Development agency "projects that 90% of the Ukrainian population could be facing poverty and extreme economic vulnerability should the war continue, setting the country and the region back decades, and leaving deep social and economic scars."

The Security Council also heard from World Health Organization Director General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who said that his agency "has verified 43 attacks" on health care facilities.

"The war in Ukraine is having devastating consequences for the health of Ukraine's people, consequences that will reverberate for years or decades to come," he said.

Ghebreyesus said that some desperately-needed medical supplies cannot be delivered because of the fighting. He said the organization has sent approximately 100 metric tons of supplies including oxygen, insulin, surgical supplies, anesthetics, and blood transfusion kits and that while the WHO has established supply lines from Lviv to many cities in Ukraine, "challenges with access remain."

"We have critical supplies ready for U.N. joint convoys to enter difficult areas, but so far we have not been successful," Ghebreyesus said. "Today, for example, the U.N. convoy to Sumy that included a WHO truck carrying critical medical supplies was unable to enter."

"Loads ready for Mariupol remain in staging areas and cannot proceed," he added.

The U.K.'s Ambassador to the U.N., Barbara Woodward, said Russian forces "are making no distinction between military targets and women and children."

Woodward also criticized Russia for "cynically almost obscenely" proposing a resolution that calls for a "negotiated ceasefire" while still "committing war crimes."

Though other parts of the U.N. have been working in Ukraine to help citizens and refugees, the Security Council has not been able to enact any enforceable measures due to Russia's veto-wielding power.

France and Mexico are currently revising their draft to present to the General Assembly, where, as Ireland's Ambassador Geraldine Byrne Nason said on Tuesday, "there are no vetoes" and there is strong support to condemn Russia's actions.

Pamela Falk is the CBS News correspondent covering the United Nations, and an international lawyer.

See the article here:
Russia declines to hold U.N. vote on its Ukraine resolution after facing pushback, China opposes global sanctions - CBS News

Russias war on Ukraine has entered a fourth week, as increasingly harsh rhetoric from Western powers towards Russian President Vladimir Putin fails to stop attacks in several cities.

It is near impossible to verify how many civilians have been killed so far. According to the United Nations, more than 600 have died but the real figure is feared to be higher.

Reports say thousands of soldiers on both sides have also died.

Meanwhile, Russia-Ukraine talks aiming for a peaceful solution continue as reports grow of Russias military becoming bogged down.

How might the situation develop from here? Here are five scenarios:

Ukrainian forces are still resisting Russias invasion, inflicting serious equipment and human losses.

Crucially, they repelled an attempt by paratroopers to seize the capital Kyiv in the opening days of the conflict and have since withdrawn to defensive positions that have enabled them to keep control over all strategic cities.

Although Russia has long claimed it has air superiority, Ukraines air defences appear to be still working, while Western countries are pouring in portable anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

The Russian invasion has largely stalled on all fronts, an update from the UK defence ministry said on Thursday.

But in an interview with Al Jazeera, Frank Ledwidge, senior lecturer in military capabilities and strategy at the University of Portsmouth, said Whats happened here is that the Russian attack has, in military terms, culminated.

Theyve gone as far as they can with the logistics and weaponry they brought into the country that doesnt necessarily mean its stalled, he said.

What were seeing now is whats called an operational pause as they start to get, in colloquial terms, their act together, which they have not had largely due to very poor planning assumptions in the early part of the campaign.

So theyd be working frantically to try to get weapons and get their planning sorted out and to understand where does it go next. And of course, Ukrainians have a say in that, which is why we are starting to see counterattacks by Ukrainian armed forces that seem to be having some effect.

United States intelligence estimates that 7,000 Russian troops have died, The New York Times reported although experts say that all such claims should be treated with caution.

US President Joe Biden announced a massive new package of military aid for Ukraine on Wednesday, including 100 Switchblade kamikaze drones and thousands more missiles.

Ukrainian military resistance comes at a high civilian cost, however, with thousands dead and towns devastated such as Mariupol and Kherson.

Negotiators from both sides began talking just days after the war started, first on the Belarus-Ukraine border, then in Turkey and later in Kyiv.

Mounting battlefield losses and crippling Western sanctions on the Russian economy could be pushing Putin to seek a face-saving way to end the conflict.

Ukraine may be able to compel the Russians to make a choice: to persist and suffer irreparable losses, or desist and achieve some compensatory peace, AFP news agency quoted Rob Johnson, a warfare expert at the University of Oxford, as writing this week.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Wednesday that the two sides were close to agreeing on a deal that would see Ukraine accept neutrality modelled on the status of Sweden and Austria.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has already publicly acknowledged that his country will not join the Western NATO military alliance a key demand from the Kremlin.

But though the chances of a deal have grown significantly in recent days, there is no sign of a ceasefire and Ukraine wants a full Russian withdrawal and security guarantees about its future.

Some Putin critics suspect that the diplomacy is a smokescreen.

Reminder that to Putin ceasefire just means reload, dissident Russian politician and former chess champion Garry Kasparov wrote on Twitter.

Putin is tightening his grip over Russian society. A crackdown on independent media and foreign news providers has cemented the dominance of the ultra-loyal Russian state media.

Thousands of anti-war demonstrators have been arrested, while a new law threatens up to 15 years in jail for spreading fake news about the army.

There are signs of cracks in the ruling elite, with some oligarchs, MPs, and even private oil group Lukoil calling openly for a ceasefire or an end to the fighting.

A Russian editor held up a sign saying No War during a prime-time news broadcast on state TV this week.

Though not seen as likely at this stage, the possibility of Putin being brought down in a popular backlash or even a palace coup cannot be ruled out.

His personal security is very good and it will be very good until the moment it isnt, said Eliot A Cohen from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think-tank.

Thats happened numerous times in Soviet and Russian history.

Given Russias superior weapons, air power and indiscriminate use of artillery, Western defence analysts say its forces are capable of grinding forward.

A senior European military official cautioned on Wednesday against underestimating their ability to replenish and adapt their tactics.

They appear to have logistical and morale problems, with diesel and even engine lubricants in short supply, the official said.

But you need to keep it in perspective. All of that does not change the superiority of the Russian military, he said.

Moscow is openly recruiting mercenaries from Syria to supplement its forces, while also using the Wagner Group, a shadowy Russian private security company.

But even if they captured strategic cities such as Kyiv or the southern port of Odesa, Putin would then face the challenge of occupying them.

Russia has a border with three former Soviet states that are now members of the US-led NATO military alliance, which considers an attack on one member to be an attack against all.

Putins nostalgia for the Soviet Union and his pledge to protect Russian minorities who are found in the Baltic States has left an open question about his territorial ambitions.

Few expect Putin to openly attack a NATO member, which would run the risk of a nuclear attack, but analysts have warned about provocations that stop short of sparking a war.

Putin has ordered Russias nuclear deterrent forces onto high alert and Foreign Minister Lavrov has also warned that World War III can only be a nuclear war.

Western analysts say such warnings should be taken as posturing to deter the US and Europe from considering ideas such as a no-fly zone over Ukraine.

See the original post here:
Where is the Russia-Ukraine war heading? Five scenarios - Al Jazeera English

Ukraine?s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy delivers a video address to senators and members of the House of Representatives gathered in the Capitol Visitor Center Congressional Auditorium at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., March 16, 2022. REUTERS/Sarah Silbiger/Pool

Register

LVIV, Ukraine, March 17 (Reuters) - Ukraine's president has not altered his stance that his country's borders must be recognised as the frontiers it had at the time of the Soviet Union's collapse in 1991, an aide said on Thursday.

The comments by political adviser Oleksiy Arestovych appeared designed to douse any talk of President Volodymyr Zelenskiy allowing border changes to secure a deal with Russia to end its invasion of its neighbour. read more

Russia annexed the Crimea peninsula from Ukraine in 2014 and Russia has recognised declarations of independence by the self-proclaimed republics of Luhansk and Donetsk in the Donbass area of eastern Ukraine which rose up against Kyiv's rule.

Register

Those two regions and Crimea were part of Ukraine when it declared independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 and continue to be recognised by the United Nations as part of Ukraine.

Zelenskiy has said repeatedly that he will not compromise on his country's "territorial integrity." read more

"His main position has not changed," Arestovych said on national television. "We will never give up our national interests."

Another presidential adviser, Mykhailo Podolyak, outlined Ukraine's position in an interview with Polish media.

"One of the key issues (for a peace agreement) remains how to resolve territorial issues in the occupied Crimea and Donbass," Podolyak said in a copy of the interview released by the Ukrainian presidency.

"Regarding the occupied territories, Ukraine's position remains unchanged: the country's borders cannot be changed. However, I believe that we must be sober in our judgments. De jure, Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk remain part of Ukraine, but we do not de facto control them, the Russian administration works there."He said efforts were being made to find "a legal formula" but did not say what this would entail.

Podolyak also hinted at increased signs of readiness to compromise by Russia, which calls its military actions a "special operation" that is not designed to occupy territory but to demilitarise and "denazify" Ukraine.

"I can say that the Russian delegation has softened sharply recently. Now they judge the world more objectively and behave very correctly. There is no rudeness or rudeness inherent in the Russian government. Of course, their world view is distorted by their own propaganda," Podolyak said.

Register

Reporting by Pavel Polityuk, Writing by Alessandra Prentice, Editing by Timothy Heritage

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

See the original post:
Ukraine says it stands firm on recognition of 1991 borders - Reuters

Russias invasion of Ukraine has forced the American left to fight on two fronts. Critics of American foreign policyand I number myself among themare making an urgent case against escalation, or the United States allowing itself to be drawn into open conflict with Russia. But instead of engaging our arguments on their merits, some people in the center and on the right are singling out versions of leftist anti-war sentiment, no matter how atypical, for ridicule.

A case in point: In late February, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) released a position statement on Russias invasion of Ukraine. The short, five-paragraph letter instantly inspired outrageprimarily because of a single sentence in its fourth paragraph. After condemning Russias invasion and urging diplomacy, de-escalation, and an immediate cease-fire, the statements authors added that the DSA reaffirms our call for the US to withdraw from NATO and to end the imperialist expansionism that set the stage for this conflict. Further remarks about American obligations toward refugees and preparing for a long-term response to this crisis followed, but so far as the majority of the reading public was concerned, the DSA might as well have said nothing else at all. Backlash followed swiftly.

Per the New York Post, the DSA had blame[d] US imperialism for the invasion; the article acknowledged that the organization had specifically condemned Russia for the brutal invasion only after a break punctuated by a prominent picture of Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the groups most notable public member. Fox News had a field day with the Squad connection, and, evidently fearing that the Democratic Party might be wrongly associated with the groups statement, White House Rapid Response Director Mike Gwin quote-tweeted a link to the release with a curt dismissal: Shameful. On the left, the statement drew both defenses and condemnation. So significant was the controversyespecially relative to the scant power represented by the release itselfthat it wound up with its own congressional denunciations and write-up in The New York Times.

Read: The war in Ukraine is just beginning

For an onlooking lefty dove, the most obnoxious aspect of the entire controversy was that it replaced a policy conversation with a moral conversation. The DSA statement expresses a series of leftist positions on American foreign policy specific to Russias invasion of Ukraine: The United States ought to prioritize de-escalation, support all efforts at a diplomatic resolution, and accept any and all refugees who need shelter in the wake of the crisis. The clause calling for the U.S. to withdraw from NATO links to a 2021 position statement from the DSA on that issue, which is a long-runningand orthogonalleftist concern. (For leftist critics of NATO, American membership has long represented wasteful, warlike spending at home and a history of failed military campaigns putatively undertaken on behalf of liberal democracy abroad.) One need not affirm that wider viewpoint to affirm the groups immediate policy proposals regarding the conflict at hand.

Of course, that argument barely had the opportunity to surface. Instead, most debate concerned whether the DSA had wrongly blamed the United States for Vladimir Putins attack on innocent civilians in Ukraine, and whether, as Gwin suggested, the group ought to be ashamed of that sort of blithe sedition. The tone of it all took me back to the pinched, stentorian discourse of the deep pandemic, when scores of articles sought to establish who, exactly, was to blame for this pathogen and its history-warping impact: the Chinese government? Reckless American bureaucrats? Maskless anti-vax extremists? Their office-holding, right-wing enablers? Open borders? Pangolins?

As it turns out, no decisive verdict on the moral debt owed by any one of those parties was necessary to make progress against COVID-19. Mainly, we needed vaccines that worked and a reliable method of distributing them. Figuring out who will answer to God for COVID-19 at the end of all things was not a part of that equation, just an entertaining distraction.

And so it goes with Russia, Ukraine, and the American lefts campaign against war. But the entertaining distraction isnt the DSAs position on U.S. withdrawal from NATO, or even assigning blame for Russias invasion of Ukraine; its Americas recapitulation of its long-standing certainty that the left is unserious, risible, ridiculous, and dismissable when it comes to matters of war and peace, and (one gathers via heavy implication) likely everything else. Some call it hippie punching. Its an American classic.

Read: Nine books to read to understand the war in Ukraine

Perhaps boisterous critics of the DSAs statement were hoping its anti-war position would meld with its remarks on NATO and U.S. imperialism in the minds of the public, then be banished together as twin heresies. But the leftist position that American military intervention in Ukraineas in, for instance, directing American and NATO forces to shoot down Russian planes flying over Ukraineis unwise and unwanted by the electorate remains credible and well attested in the mainstream. Since the beginning of Russias incursion into Ukraine, Senator Bernie Sanders has led the left with calls for sanctions, emergency preparations for refugee resettlement, and stalwart hope for a diplomatic resolutionjust as DSA didas well as a green-energy shift away from the oil and gas that fund Russias military. Rather than clash with hawkish members of Congress who would prefer escalation, Sanders has limited his remarks to what aid to Ukraine ought to look like: swift, decisive, humanitarian, without the heedless sacrifice of blood and treasure for no clear benefit that has marked the American experience of war abroad for the past 20 years.

Nor does the anti-war position mean, as some critics are wont to suggest, abandoning Ukraine. In his address to Congress on Wednesday morning, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made several requests of the United States that are perfectly compatible with a leftist vision of American foreign policy. He asked, for instance, that the United States target all Russian politicians currently holding office with economic sanctions, and that all American companies immediately stop doing business with Russia; though each measure would certainly have unfortunate consequences for ordinary Russians, who are not at fault for Putins war, their effects would likely be less devastating than an outright military conflict between the two superpowers. Zelensky also urged Americans to continue our efforts to cut off the flow of U.S. dollars into Russiawhich underscores the crucial necessity of an energy transition that could help wean this country off of Russian oil and gas, something the left supports wholeheartedly. And he hoped for humanitarian aidwhich the United States should deliver with neither limitation nor delay.

There were things Zelensky wanted that he himself seemed to know he could not reasonably expect to receive: He acknowledged that a no-fly zone over Ukraine, for example, might well be too much to ask. Instead, he proposed that the United States and its allies continue to arm Ukraine, possibly with aircraft, a move the Biden administration recently vetoedand not without good reason. Although there may be no rational distinction between forms of American aid to Ukraine that are not viewed by Putins regime as provocations and forms of aid that are viewed as such, there is nevertheless a political distinction between the two: One carries relatively little risk of escalating a conflict between two nuclear powers and the other carries a substantially heightened risk of the same. Thus the Biden administration ought to continue to take care to offer maximal support to Ukraine without triggering a Russian response that would intensify conditions on the ground and potentially make an already cataclysmic situation that much more hellish.

In an announcement following Zelenskys address Wednesday, Biden promised another $800 million in aid to Ukraine, while renewing his vow not to join the conflict militarily.

Though certain politicians have pressed Biden to risk more intervention than he seems willing to venture, the president has thus far remained steadfast in his decision not to send troops to Ukraine and is still holding out against demands to enforce a no-fly zone. Putins savagery in Ukraine is despicablea despotic onslaught that has already put babies and children in frozen graves. What Biden appears to suspect is that military intervention will only furnish the pits with further corpses. For him, as for Sanders, as for the DSA, as for me, as for plenty of war-weary Americans, the nuclear stakes are too high, the possibility of world war too imminent, the likelihood of success far too remote. Theres nothing ill-considered or naive about that.

Go here to see the original:
The Left Has Good Answers on Ukraine - The Atlantic