in

Ukraine Says It Might Use U.S. Weapons to Invade Russia

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

Eric Zuesse

In order to understand this matter, some fundamental background must first be briefly presented; and it is this (the remainder of this paragraph): Ukraine’s Government has consistently promised that it will retake Crimea, which had been part of Russia during 1783-1954 when the Soviet leader Khrushchev then transferred it to Ukraine, and which subsequently broke away from Ukraine in 2014 to rejoin Russia. Russia has re-established its sovereignty there, after a 2014 referendum in Crimea showed over 90% support by voters for Russia to do so. That’s the background.

On June 1st, when the White House announced that it would be sending to Ukraine weapons that might be used for invading Russia, Jonathan Finer, deputy White House national security adviser, said Washington had asked Ukraine for assurances the missiles would not strike inside Russia. On June 3rd, Ukraine’s Government rejected that request.

At the time when Biden made that announcement on June 1st, Reuters noted that, “Biden announced the plan to give Ukraine precision HIMARS rocket systems after receiving assurances from Kyiv that it would not use them to hit targets inside Russian territory.”

Either the U.S. Government is lying, or else the Ukrainian Government is lying, about this matter. If Ukraine did give Biden “assurances” that those weapons will not be used so as to invade Russia, then Ukraine’s announcement on June 3rd proves that Ukraine was lying when it provided those “assurances.” 

If Ukraine did not give give Biden such “assurances,” then Biden was lying.

If Ukraine was lying on June 3rd to say that it won’t comply with Biden’s request, then that was a lie from Ukraine.

Here is the way Russia’s RT News reported, on June 3rd, Ukraine’s rejection of Biden’s request (assuming that Biden did make such a request; wasn’t lying about that):

“Ukraine dismisses its promise to US”

Kiev may strike Crimea, a Ukrainian presidential aide says, despite assurances US weapons won’t be used to hit Russian territory.

Ukraine will use US-supplied rocket systems to strike into Russian territory should it deem such attacks necessary, Ukrainian Presidential Adviser Alexey Arestovich said on Thursday. …

“Crimea is ours. It belongs to Ukraine. And they [Russia] know it.” …

Arestovich’s comment comes despite US Secretary of State Antony Blinken saying on Wednesday that Kiev has given Washington “assurances” that it won’t use American rockets to attack targets in Russia. …

Arestovich’s statement echoes the claim made by another Ukrainian politician. Egor Chernev, a Ukrainian MP, said on Wednesday that Russian aircraft and military stationed on Russia’s territory are “legitimate targets.”

If Ukraine uses U.S. weapons to invade Russia, then under existing international law, the U.S. will be a participant in that invasion. Russia would have a good case that (given the facts which have just been documented here), that participation would be either intentional, or else negligent. It would not have been unintentional on America’s part. Russia would, at the very least, then ask America whether that participation was intentional, or instead negligent. If America says “negligent,” then Russia would ask what America will do to rectify that matter. If America instead says “intentional,” then there will exist, from that moment on, a hot war between Russia and America. The loser in any hot war between Russia and America will escalate the conflict to a nuclear war in order to avoid becoming conquered by the other side. That would be not only WW III but a nuclear WW III, and would destroy all of the allies of each side, and would severely contaminate even neutral countries, and end globally in a nuclear winter, which would possibly end all life as it has existed on this planet. 

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s next book (soon to be published) will be AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change. It’s about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

Report

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

What do you think?

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
7 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Charles Smith
Charles Smith
June 4, 2022

Assuming that the US gov’t and the US military do not want all out war with Russia, what can they do to prevent it? The Ukraine gov’t and military are in a position to instigate that war. What if they do? What if insanely nationalistic forces do just that? Until recently I hoped that the Ukraine military might inhibit the Ukraine gov’t from taking conflagratory actions, but the fact of a burgeoning bazaar in black market sales of weapons seemingly once supplied to Ukraine has dampened that possibility in my mind as Ukraine military officers involved would be loath to… Read more »

Helga Fellay
Helga Fellay
Reply to  Charles Smith
June 5, 2022

It’s more than obvious that the US gov’t wants all out war with Russia. I doubt that the US military does – I am guessing they are split, some neocon generals do, but many others don’t. The Ukraine gov’t and military are in NO position to instigate that war. Since the US regime change coup of 2014, they are another puppet state and Zelensky does as told.

Eddy
Eddy
Reply to  Charles Smith
June 5, 2022

Quote, “Is the takeover of Ukraine governance by trustworthy entities the only possible assurance?” Unquote.
Please, give us an example of a “trustworthy entities” to take over the Ukrainian Govt, besides the Russians, that is .

Charles Smith
Charles Smith
Reply to  Eddy
June 7, 2022

1=a coalition of Ukrainian military and civilian forces other than nationalists

2- a UN sponsored provisional gov’t with UN oversite

3- you and I (me?)

Orion
Orion
June 4, 2022

Ukraine is never going to be in a position to invade Russia, with or without US weapons. As for NATO support, that is just a lot of hot air at the moment. However, I do agree with your scenario of a WW3 if things go badly wrong for either Russia or US in a direct confrontation. Most people are too unaware to even consider this possibility.

Eddy
Eddy
Reply to  Orion
June 5, 2022

Given the back ground of U.S. ALLEGED Promises, what creditability can anyone, place on promises from such an entity ? It seems the Promise of never moving NATO 1 inch closer to Russia has all but been forgotten. Clearly, any such alleged promises from the U.S. are not worth their value on toilet paper. Ukraine promises ????? Seriously, do we even need to discuss that issue at all ? I distinctly recall all sorts of promises being made to their very own troops caught at Mariupol, L.O.L. and how did they turn out ? So Biden has stood up and… Read more »

Last edited 2 months ago by Eddy

Politics and policy driving the Ukraine project w/ Jacob Dreizin (Live)

Russian Advances in Ukraine Alarms Washington, African Union Meeting with Russia Looking for Food, Energy.