The analysis is a typical example of the position defended by a major Arab media outlet that has been operating for 10 years and competes with world-renowned names such as Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, Sky News Arabia and the Arabic branch of the BBC. “Al-Mayadeen” is considered a media that promotes positions pleasing to the regime of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and “Hezbollah”. In addition, at the beginning of June, the media wrote about the democratically elected regime in Ukraine, the Russian support, that they are “Nazis” – and directly using the word, without any detours. And when the revelations from the “Pandora Papers” came out, a material appeared in “Al Mayadin” that specifically cast doubt on the mole’s work, since there were no Americans in the revelations. The iconic publication Forbes specifically devoted an article dedicated to the lack of Americans, with a lengthy explanation, namely – that the tax laws in the US actually favor billionaires to a very large extent, and there is taxation only after the sale of a capital asset, ie. its realization. Separately, converting assets into long-term capital assets allows for lower taxation, sometimes even at a zero rate. In other words, there is no need for people like Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg or Bill Gates to run away from US offshore laws to avoid paying taxes – they just found other ways that are legal under US law.
The analysis of military expert Charles Abi Nadir for “Al-Mayadeen” that the US is starting to look for a peace agreement in Ukraine with Russia at any cost is particularly revealing, because in one place many supports can be found, garnished with facts and truths taken out of context. But the most telling is, that it became unavailable online in English, it is available in Arabic. Here’s what else it said:
Of course, it is not logical to think that the Americans have changed their attitude towards the Ukrainian crisis. But on what basis can the conclusion be drawn that they seek a quick end to the conflict, regardless of its outcome?
Three main directions can be distinguished. The first is in the political strategy of France, which, unfortunately, cannot make any decisions without the approval of the US.
The second direction is of a marked economic nature and is related to the energy crisis in Europe.
The third direction concerns the military sphere. We are talking about arms supplies to Kyiv from Washington and some European NATO member countries, including Germany.
The following is known about the first direction (political):
French President Emmanuel Macron agreed with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi on an acceptable approach to ensure the safety of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and take appropriate measures to prevent a possible nuclear accident (ed. note – in fact, Macron agreed only for an IAEA mission to reach the headquarters). The plant has been shelled by the Ukrainian armed forces because, according to the Ukrainian authorities, it was illegally seized by the Russian military (ed. note – what is actually happening at the plant and who is shelling what: TEST: Do you understand things with the Zaporozhye NPP).
Apart from the issue of ensuring the safety of the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, contacts between the presidents of Russia and France and their aides, including the defense ministers, have not been interrupted throughout the conflict in Ukraine. Russia welcomed and contributed (ed. note – how exactly did he contribute? Maybe because there was an escort of four Russian-made fighters from the Algerian Air Force for Macron and this is Putin’s contribution?!) for the success of President Macron’s visit to Algeria, although his main objective was to increase the supply of Algerian gas as an alternative to Russian fuel, which would benefit not only France but all of Europe.
The second direction (economic) is closely related to the first (political). First of all, we are talking about the gas problem in Europe. According to a report by the American organization RAND Corporation, the mistakes that led to the EU’s strong dependence on Russian energy sources cannot be eliminated by returning to environmentally harmful resources. It is necessary to review the strategy in order to achieve a political settlement of the situation and prevent a real catastrophe.
The third direction (military) is the most important and it is as follows:
US Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Affairs Colin Kahl recently said: “Weapons deliveries to Ukraine under a new $2.98 billion military aid package will begin in the next few months and continue for several years. America will deliver missiles under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative in the event of continued hostilities or a ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine.”
Based on the above, the following conclusions can be drawn: First, the determination of the delivery period from several months to several years means that this package is not intended to support the armed forces of Ukraine in the battles in Donbas, since they are unlikely to last so long. Rather, the armed forces of Ukraine need direct and immediate support.
Secondly, the weapons supplied to Ukraine are air-to-air missiles, of which there are only two old models – AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-7 Sparrow (note ed. – from where the Arab author draws a conclusion about the supply of these missiles is a mystery, given the official announcement about the parameters of the aid, where it is indicated what is given. Maybe he has his own information – right?! From now on, any reasoning, and you can read to the end of the paragraph, it is questionable to say the least). They are designed to destroy aerial targets and are carried exclusively by American F-4, F-15 and F-16 fighter-bombers. These aircraft are not in service with the Ukrainian Air Force and there is still no news about their transfer. From this we can conclude that the delivery of missiles to Ukraine in the foreseeable future is unlikely, and the announcement of the Americans is simply part of a propaganda campaign. But if they were still serious, they would take this step only when it became possible, that is, after the end of hostilities and with the consent of Moscow. Today, Russia completely controls the airspace of Ukraine, and the West has not yet taken serious decisions to deprive it of this control. (ed. note – in fact, a bunch of Western publications have commented very seriously on how exactly the Russian Air Force is seriously failing in Ukraine, especially since the supply of Western weapons to the Ukrainian army has become more regular – here’s an example from Newsweek, in the Asia Times also has a recent comprehensive analysis of Russian military hardware.And the delivery of NASAMS is another step in Russia not having the control over Ukrainian airspace that it wants)
Another fact, on the basis of which we can conclude that the Americans are tired of the Ukrainian crisis and want it to end as soon as possible, is a statement by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. He announced that Berlin would not supply weapons to Ukraine for strikes on Russian territory. The US President Joe Biden adheres to the same position. (ed. note – but this does not prevent the USA from supplying the most weapons to Ukraine, and since a month and a half ago, the war has passed into a phase that does not bring certain success to Russia: And the Russians already recognize the successes of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, Peskov talk about negotiation)
Such statements are not heard for the first time and are part of the strategy of NATO member states, which seek to prevent Ukrainian troops from striking Russian territory. But practically everyone is convinced that the armed forces of Ukraine cannot change the situation in Donbas or southern Ukraine with the help of medium-range weapons obtained from NATO member states (ed. note – quotes from experts convinced of this are missing). However, they need higher end weapons than what they currently get. But then they will be able to hit the territory of Russia. The West cannot allow this.
It can be concluded that the Americans and, of course, the Europeans began to seriously think about resuming the dialogue with Moscow in order to end the conflict in Ukraine and save the West from the coming economic crisis, which it will not be able to overcome if hostilities do not stop.
MORE: Is Putin Afraid to Mobilize Entire Russian Army for War in Ukraine?
Translation: Gancho Kamenarski