Blinken and U.S. will not push Ukraine fence-sitters to take sides
Plus: Weekly Insights and Analysis--Mar-a-Lago and the American Front; Attack on Russian airbase in the Crimea; Critical situationl at Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant
Given the length of the articles, readers may want to read Parts One and Two separately
Part One—Main Article
Blinken and U.S. pursue accommodation with fence-sitters in Africa and “the South”
This first section is adapted from The Trenchant Observer, August 7, 20221
Zalmay Khalilzad’s recommendation
Former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad punctures the Russian propaganda line that it is interested in peace negotiations, and offers three sensible suggestions for U.S. policy in support of Ukraine.2
He accurately describes the current situation, as follows:
For a reliable indicator of Russian intentions, look to what they are doing on the ground. It looks nothing like a prelude to a political settlement. Instead Moscow is preparing for escalation and a land grab. This includes preparation to annex territory currently under its control, gain control of additional territory, conduct attacks on major cities outside the Donbas region, and eradicate the Ukrainian identity wherever possible.
He then offers three suggestions for U.S. strategy toard Russia.
The third is particularly important. Khalilzad hits the nail on the head in pointing out the weakness of U.S. efforts to enlist support for Ukraine in Africa and Asia, where it is losing the information war.
It is also losing the information war in the Middle East and in parts of Latin America.
He makes a key point stressing that, “Ukrainians are the best spokesmen for their own cause. The U.S. should help them make their case—to the receptive West, around the world and inside Russia.”
To make the strongest case, the U.S. must overcome its squeamishness about referring to international law and the U.N. Charter.
All of the b.s. about supporting a “rules-based international order”, which has become common jargon among NATO and other allies, should just be abandoned.
It lacks the punch and specificity of “international law and the U.N. Charter", lacks the resonance of the latter in the countries of “the South”, and is in effect meaningless verbiage with little or no persuasive effect.3
To use international law effectively, it may be necessary to appoint a new secretary of state. Antony Blinken, though he holds a law degree, appears to hold international law in low regard.4
Nor has Blinken used international law effectively in criticizing the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
It appears to be a blind spot for Blinken.
Yet it is too important, in terms of generating support for Ukraine and in many other ways (e.g., deterring China from threatening or using force against Taiwan) to be allowed to persist as a blind spot for the United States and its allies.
Blinken’s Africa trip, and the U.S. policy to let fence-sitters5 sit on the fence
Secretary of State Antony Blinken traveled to Africa this last week and set forth a new American policy for Sub-Saharan Africa. At a speech at the University of Pretoria in South Africa on August 8 , he articulated what is in most respects a clear-eyed and reasonable U.S. policy for the region.6
Unfortunately, the language about partnership and not imposing decisions on African countries, which makes a lot of sense generally, underlined the fact that the U.S. is not going to push African countries to take sides on the issue of Russian aggression against Ukraine. Many in the the region see this issue as part of a superpower competition they want to steer clear of.
The decision to not push countries in “the South” to condemn Russia for its invasion of Ukraine or to take part in the sanctions regime represents an extremely grave foreign policy error. It is a blunder which is likely to affect the length of the war, and possibly its outcome.
Writing for the Wall Street Journal, Gabriele Steinhauser and Jessica Donat report:
The U.S. won’t ask African governments to pick sides in an intensifying standoff with other powers such as Russia and China, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in South Africa Monday, in a speech about the Biden administration’s strategy toward the continent.7
In his speech, Blinken announced a new policy toward African countries:
In a speech at the University of Pretoria Monday, Mr. Blinken said African governments were free to make their own choices about who to support in the renewed competition with Russia, which has drawn comparisons to the battles for influence of the Cold War era. The top U.S. envoy previously outlined the administration’s vision for Africa in a November speech in Nigeria, in which he promised to treat African governments as equals.
“Too often, African nations have been treated as instruments of other nations’ progress, rather than the authors of their own. Time and again, they have been told to pick a side in great power contests that feel far removed from daily struggles of their people,” he said. “The United States will not dictate Africa’s choices. Neither should anyone else.”
With this speech, Blinken in effect threw away the strongest weapon of the U.S. and the West in the struggle to gain support in “the South” for condemnation of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide.
This policy undermines efforts to gain support for Ukraine in the fence-sitting nations of the so-called “South”.
It undercuts efforts to build an effective sanctions regime which can help pressure Vladimir Putin to bring the war in Ukraine to an early end.
It undercuts those civilian governments in Africa which are fighting Russian-backed militias such as the mercenary Wagner Group (which is also fighting in Ukraine).
It undercuts all those in Africa who are fighting to protect human rights and establish democracy and the rule of law, as the U.S. will not pressure their governments to support these values in Ukraine by condemning Russian aggression and adopting sanctions to bring the war to a halt.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine is not a competition between the Western countries and Russia, but rather an existential struggle to uphold the United Nations Charter and international law, and to defend our civilization which rests on these two pillars.
Part Two—Insights and Analysis
Weekly Section
The American Front in the Ukraine War
Ukraine attacks Russian air base in the Crimea
The shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant