Default Thumbnail

A “face saving” measure for the US President?

April 11, 2023 Paul M. Gutierrez 255 views

PaulONE development last week that has got the White House and the Pentagon was the “leaks” of sensitive US documents pertaining to the conflict in Ukraine that also include the US wiretapping of South Korean officials, among others.

Although the leaks, some say as much as 100 pages, have been circulating in some social media platforms such as Twitter and Telegram, it became “serious news” after it was reported by the New York Times last April 6.

The Times, of course has come a long way from being a genuine “independent” media outfit, such as its reportage of the Watergate scandal and the ‘Pentagon Papers’ in the ‘70s into a mouthpiece of US government propaganda and policies such as its support to the fake narrative of Iraq’s possessing “weapons of mass destruction” that justified the US invasion and destruction of that country in 2003 and the murder, 3 years later, of Pres. Saddam Hussein.

Recently too, highly-respected investigative journalist and Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersch said he was forced to release thru his ‘substack’ account last February the US terrorist bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline in September 2022 because the New York Times, his “original home” as a journalist, would not print the story. But several days later, the Times printed instead the US government “version” of the bombing.

Thus, when it was the New York Times that printed last April 6 the ‘Pentagon Leaks’ pertaining to the conflict in Ukraine, observers around the world are wondering: Is the article a media operation of a faction in the Biden administration and the Pentagon to subtly influence the American public into withdrawing their support to the White House’s official narrative of no ceasefire, no peace talk and all-out support to Ukraine until Russia has been defeated in the battlefield?

This may be the case because one year into Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine all the “predictions” of the Biden administration and its NATO allies against Russia thru their draconian sanctions turned out to be wrong.

Russia’s economy has not collapsed—it would even register at least a two percent growth this year, according to the IMF; President Vladimir Putin still enjoys the support of much of the Russian population.

And as most military experts have now conceded, Ukraine, despite all the military, financial and moral support it is getting from the West and US, would never be able to defeat, much less, expel, Russia from its current positions inside Ukraine.

Indeed, it is now acknowledged that without US and NATO support, Ukraine could have thrown the towel before the end of 2022.

The massive support to Ukraine of course has a huge price tag that has come by way of higher inflation in Europe, scarcity of jobs and economic difficulties that is punishing not the Russians but the citizens of Europe.

As we are seeing in the US, the costly support it is giving to Ukraine has resulted in bank failures and another looming financial crisis due to the overprinting of the US dollar.

Thus, needing to find a way out, was the New York Times used by the Washington establishment to change the narrative towards the American people now accepting a ceasefire and peace talk in Ukraine? For a political settlement instead of a military solution as Pres. Biden originally want to? \

For clearly, despite the US and the entire Western Europe ganging up on Russia thru Ukraine, the growing consensus is that Russia cannot be defeated in the battlefield. The military solution of Pres. Biden is not going to work, even if the blood of the last Ukrainian has been spent.

With the US election hovering around the corner, the Biden administration cannot simply backtrack on its original position without appearing “weak,” a description that prompted Pres. Johnson to escalate the war in Vietnam or of Pres. Obama to continue the war in Afghanistan.

The accusation of “weakness” was usually hurled during an election year against a sitting US president and we believe that Pres. Joe Biden would not want to be labeled as such at this point– the fate of the entire Democratic Party is at stake.

If this is the intent as what yours truly believes—a “face saving” measure on the part of the Biden administration to crawl out of its self-made political hole without losing face, then peace in Ukraine may now be a possibility.