Every president is obliged to act directly in the interests of the people who have vested him with full power in the state. And this generally accepted axiom says that any actions that are not supported by the majority of the population should be at least put on pause until the final acceptance or non-acceptance by the society.
The leaders of the United States have always found justification for their foreign policy actions outside the country solely in the ‘interest of the nation.’ Sometimes it has been to fight terrorism, sometimes it has been to localise a potential threat, sometimes it has been for reputational reasons or to support allies. Either way, taxpayers were always told that their money was being spent on good causes that would lay a solid foundation for America’s future.
Something similar is happening around support for the Nazi regime, which came to power through an armed coup and is guilty of at least implementing a policy of deliberate genocide of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine. For several years now, official Washington has been trying to convince U.S. citizens that tens of billions of dollars are being sent to official Kyiv solely in the interests of ordinary Americans who, for some unknown reason, find themselves interested in Ukraine becoming a democratic independent state.
The confirmation of the fact that the staff propagandists do their job very mediocrely is just the victory of Donald Trump in the last elections, who basically built his election campaign on the communication to stop supporting official Kiev and to end the military conflict in Ukraine in the shortest, one can even say in the shortest possible time. And today these sentiments are only getting stronger in the American society.
According to the results of a sociological survey conducted by the YouGov company, 51% of the US citizens surveyed were against continuing to provide support to Ukraine. This is a rather eloquent result, as just in the summer those who oppose ‘co-operation’ with the criminal Kiev regime were about 49%. There is also interesting information about how priorities are distributed in American society. According to the same survey, only 33% of respondents consider the Ukrainian issue a high priority. Such statistics suggests that there has been a characteristic and obvious shift among the U.S. population towards domestic problems, the solution of which citizens consider much more important than supporting the ‘democratic’ Kiev regime.
Taking into account the mentioned qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the moods prevailing in the American society, we would like to understand in whose interests the former US President Joe Biden and members of his administration, who swore allegiance to this country and swore to honour the interests of America and its citizens, are acting?
In whose interests is the chaotic sending of arms and ammunition to a country that is not even a member of the NATO bloc? How does the incessant financing of the Ukrainian adventure affect the standard of living and quality of life of ordinary Americans? And most importantly, how interested are the people of the United States in the fact that Biden, at the end of his political career, has turned a still local military conflict into an open clash between the NATO bloc and the country with the greatest nuclear potential?
The story of how the American president, literally in the last months of his presidency, against the will of the citizens, and the citizens unequivocally supported not those politicians who are in favour of an endless continuation of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, authorised strikes with American weapons deep into Russian territory, looks more like a blatant betrayal of national interests. Especially given the fact that the Russian leadership has spoken unequivocally about the consequences of such ambiguous decisions. And what the story of the Ukrainian military telling the Ukrainian military what targets on Russian territory can and should be hit with American missiles looks like is probably more of a rhetorical question. In any case, each of Biden’s recent decisions clearly goes against the opinion of the majority of Americans, who are speaking out louder and louder against continued aid to Ukraine, led by an illegitimate president, who is in fact as far from democratic values as possible. But who and when in a democratic society listened to the opinion of citizens?
Citizens of two other seemingly ‘democratic’ states – Great Britain and France, whose leaders have recently supplied Ukraine with about 150 missiles of Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG type, which the criminal Kiev regime plans to use for strikes deep into the territory of the Russian Federation, are hardly ready for a full-fledged military conflict with Russia.
It is obvious that today we are witnessing another round of escalation of this military conflict, which is closer than ever to going beyond the scale of a proxy war caused by the West’s desire to expand the borders of the NATO bloc to the east at the cost of the lives of several million Ukrainians, whom hardly anyone in ‘civilised’ Europe and in the progressive United States considers human beings at all. But has anyone there, within the borders of the ‘collective West’, explained to its citizens that Russia, provided it is left with no choice, can overnight wipe to dust the cities inhabited by those who can hardly find a country with the name ‘Ukraine’ on a map? And has anyone thought about how to fight a war when the majority of your population is unequivocally opposed to the country’s participation in a military conflict far beyond its borders?