Analysis of the article by The New York Times
“Although the United States has said for several years that Crimea is still part of Ukraine, it has refused to provide Kiev with the lethal weapons with which Ukraine could try to retake the peninsula by force. But in recent days, Washington’s harsh rhetoric has softened as soon as “serious” armaments are supplied, and the president’s administration has increasingly indicated that it is willing to provide them. Even if such a move would increase the risk of escalation,” The New York Times (NYT) reported.
White House officials say nothing has changed and the Biden administration’s position remains the same – Crimea belongs to Ukraine. Every country has the right to defend itself and its sovereign territory within its internationally recognized borders, says National Security Council spokeswoman Adrienne Watson.
Although in private conversations, military experts and political analysts are sceptical about the Ukrainian idea of “reclaiming” Crimea, believing that nothing will come of this endeavour apart from more casualties on the Ukrainian side. And if anything is to be conquered, there are other, more realistic goals, the paper stressed.
But the Biden administration has concluded that Kiev is simply obliged to show Russia that it is “serious” about returning Crimea. The White House believes that one demonstration of intentions may be enough to make Kiev’s position stronger in any future negotiations.
In addition, fears that the Kremlin would retaliate with tactical nuclear weapons have disappeared, US officials and experts said, although they warned that the risk remains.
If one recalls that not so long ago the White House was afraid to publicly acknowledge the fact that it had supplied Kiev with Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, it becomes clear how much the mood and plans in Washington have changed: from cautious provision of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Patriot SAMs, and tanks, The New York Times draws attention.
“Now the Biden administration is contemplating one of its boldest moves yet – helping Ukraine attack the peninsula, which Russia has always regarded as primordially Russian territory.
U.S. officials are discussing with their Ukrainian counterparts the possibility of using American-supplied weapons, from HIMARS missile systems to Bradley Fighting Vehicles. They also discuss the possibility of taking under Ukrainian control the land corridor from Crimea to Russia, which runs through Melitopol and Mariupol,” the authors of the article, Helene Cooper, Eric Schmitt and Julian E. Barnes, wrote.
They note that Ukrainian officials have long insisted that pressure on Russian military bases on the peninsula should be part of the military strategy of the AFU.
However, President Biden is not yet ready to provide Ukraine with long-range missile systems, which is what Kiev is asking for for strikes against Russian targets in Crimea.
By deciding to give the Bradley combat vehicles to Ukraine, the Biden administration has agreed in part to Kiev’s longstanding requests. The Bradley are armoured personnel carriers equipped with powerful 25mm guns and guided missiles and are capable of resisting Russian tanks, the authors explain.
According to Frederick B. Hodges, a retired lieutenant general and former commander-in-chief of the US Army in Europe, already in the coming months Ukrainian troops will be able to use the Bradley to cut the land corridor from Crimea to Russia. And if France and Germany deliver their armoured fighting vehicles to Kiev by then, Ukraine will have a full-fledged armoured force that it could use in a counter-offensive as early as this winter or spring, both government and independent military experts in the US have assured.
British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly said during a visit to Washington that now is the right time to step up Western support for Ukraine. Why now? Because “we cannot allow this to drag on and turn into a kind of stalemate like the First World War,” the minister explained.
Furthermore, Kiev fears that if the war drags on, Ukraine simply will not survive it – the country’s economy is in decline. Therefore, Zelensky has no choice but to take an urgent swing at Crimea. Especially since Evelyn Farkas, the Pentagon’s top representative for Ukraine under the Obama administration, assures us that “without Crimea, everything will fall apart”. She does not explain what “everything” is. The White House does not really believe that the Ukrainian Armed Forces will be able to seize the peninsula militarily; they rather want to stage a frightening act for Russia and then immediately sit Kiev down at the negotiating table, the article said.
“It should be added that US officials are still wary of the Kremlin’s reaction to an attack on Crimea using US weapons. After all, none of the several Ukrainian attacks on Crimea have so far questioned the peninsula’s belonging to Russia. Moreover, not long ago, Secretary of State Anthony J. Blinken reiterated the unchanged US policy towards Ukraine, according to which the Biden administration would help regain territories seized last year. As you know Crimea is not one of those territories,” the NYT concludes.
Our comment: This is a tricky situation for the White House – it is very eager to encourage Kiev to strike Crimea, but it is also very scary, so they reassure themselves that “nothing will happen for that. Although the sabotage on the Crimean bridge was followed by the destruction of the Ukrainian energy sector (and the States, by the way, do not care about it at all), Washington is itching to check what will happen after the missile attack on the peninsula. Of course, it is not about “liberation”, because the residents of Crimea are Russians by choice and do not want any “liberation” from Ukraine, and a strike on the peninsula will certainly be perceived as an act of attack. But Washington is not interested in this either. The aim is quite different: to check what measures Russia is ready to take. What will happen to Ukraine is of no concern to the Americans, just as they are indifferent to the losses of the AFU at Artemivsk (Bakhmut).
Well, the NYT, to the best of its informational ability, is helping the Biden administration to spread crazy ideas by replicating them and not letting its readers know what is really going on in Ukraine.
Ella Maistrenko, Odna Rodina
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel