"At this point, the Biden administration does not appear to have any endgame in mind," says David T. Pyne, an EMP Task Force scholar and former U.S. Department of Defenсe officer. "It's only strategy appears to be to try to prolong the war in Ukraine as long as possible, with little to no regard for the lives of the tens of thousands of Ukrainians and the destruction of most of its major cities that would inevitably ensue, in the hopes that Russia will give up the fight and withdraw all of its military forces from the territory that Ukraine controlled prior to the Russian invasion."
At the same time, the Biden administration's earlier plan of aiding the Ukrainian insurgency against the Russian military does not seem viable, because it "would not serve the US national security interest," according to the ex-Pentagon officer.
In December 2021, the US administration task force, which includes the CIA and other key agencies, started examining how to ramp up Ukrainian insurgency "without directly involving US troops" in case Russia engages in a military conflict with the Ukrainian government forces, according to the Washington Post.
Still, according to Pyne, Russia’s eventual military victory over Ukraine "is not in serious doubt for many reasons including its military superiority in every type of major weapon system as well as the fact that its population is four times greater, providing it with a much larger manpower pool."
A protestor calls for on NATO to enforce a no-fly zone over the Ukraine during a demonstration in Paris, France, Saturday, Feb. 26, 2022
© AP Photo / Peter Dejong
NATO Troops, No-Fly Zones & False Flag Ops
Meanwhile, some politicians including Ludovic Hood, the former adviser to VPs Mike Pence and Kamala Harris, proposed to "insert heavily armoured forces into pockets of western Ukraine." At the same time, 27 former American diplomats and ex-DoD officials signed an open letter to President Joe Biden urging him to implement a "limited no-fly zone in Ukraine." Both requests have been rejected by the White House so far.
"The Biden administration has wisely and repeatedly stated that it would not support either the creation of a 'no-fly zone' or any deployment of US military forces to Ukraine as that would inevitably lead to World War III with Russia, which both the Biden administration and the Russian government would prefer to avoid," says Pyne. "I believe that it is sincere in stating it will continue to oppose any irrational calls to do so. I think the calls by some US elected leaders to escalate the US proxy war against the Russian Federation in Ukraine are extremely dangerous and destabilizing to the prospects of world peace and international stability."
The former Pentagon officer expresses skepticism about the allegations voiced by some US lawmakers and mainstream media pundits that Russia could resort to using weapons of mass destruction to quickly end the special operation on its terms.
"There is no evidence whatsoever that I am aware of in the open-source international media to substantiate such spurious claims that Russia has any plans to do so," says Pyne. "Furthermore, Russia has thus far demonstrated surprising restraint in refraining from using its most powerful weapons against Ukraine in an effort to limit civilian casualties and collateral damage, which has been encouraging."
The EMP Task Force scholar notes that he finds it interesting that "Western leaders began circulating these suspicious reports that Russia may be planning to use chemical and biological weapons in Ukraine after Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland admitted under oath in a US Senate hearing that the US has been funding 26 Ukrainian biological research labs for many years and was very concerned that biological weapon samples might fall into Russian hands."
"That was essentially an admission by the US government that Ukraine does in fact have US-funded biological weapons research labs even though it has stated that these research labs are defensive in nature," he remarks.
At the same time, Pyne rejects allegations that the Pentagon could be planning false flag ops involving chemical and biological weapons in Ukraine in cahoots with Ukrainian nationalists to pin the blame on Russia.
"What would US leaders hope to gain by initiating World War III against Russia?" asks Pyne. "There would be no possible benefit for them to incentivise them to engage in such false-flag operations."
National flags of Russia and Ukraine
© Sputnik / Vladimir Trefilov
View From the West: Ukraine as 'Neutral State'
President Biden could help end the conflict and must take the lead in taking a stand for peace by increasing its support for the efforts of the Israeli government and other international leaders to mediate an end to the conflict, argues Pyne.
"I believe that a far better alternative would be for Ukraine to become a neutral buffer state between the US and NATO, which would serve to enhance both Russian and NATO security," says the former Pentagon official. "In order to accomplish this, the Biden administration should immediately establish diplomatic channels with the Russian government and offer to rollback all new economic sanctions against Russia in return for a Russian ceasefire and peace agreement with Ukraine that would be followed by a full Russian military withdrawal from Ukraine. The Biden administration should also act to immediately suspend all military assistance to Ukraine and then have a frank discussion with [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky to inform him that it is in both of our national security interests that Ukraine negotiates a compromise peace agreement with Moscow along the lines that the Russian delegation most recently offered."
These terms include Ukraine amending its constitution to prohibit its government from aligning with any military bloc including NATO; the indefinite suspension of all military ties and future military assistance to Ukraine by NATO countries; its recognition of Crimea's reunification with Russia as well as the independence of the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics along their constitutional boundaries. In return, Russia would withdraw all of its military forces from Ukrainian territory and guarantee Ukraine’s territorial integrity, according to the scholar.
This handout photograph taken and released by The Ukrainian Presidential Press Service on April 20, 2021, shows Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky speaking during his late evening address in Kiev.
© AFP 2023 / HANDOUT
"While these terms would be difficult for Ukraine to accept given the loss of over six percent of its territory and population under its control before the Russian invasion, they would help to ensure Ukraine’s continued political independence along the lines of the very successful Finnish historical model," says Pyne.
As the EMP Task Force scholar noted in his recent National Interest op-ed, "the effect of such an agreement would be very similar to the Moscow Peace Treaty of 1940, which ended the Winter War between Finland and the USSR and ensured Finland’s long-term independence."
The biggest obstacle for this is that the United States and NATO continue to give false hope to Ukrainian leaders and the fact that Washington "has painted itself into a corner by propagating false accusations of systematic Russian war crimes in Ukraine and deliberate targeting of civilians on a systematic scale," according to the ex-DoD officer.
"I fear that the Biden administration is overly concerned about being criticised for accommodating Russia even though in this instance it is in the US national security interest to do so in order to avoid a war between the nuclear superpowers and to normalise diplomatic relations with Moscow as well as to overturn self-defeating economic sanctions on Russia that threaten a global recession," Pyne concludes.
Let's stay in touch no matter what! Follow our Telegram channel to get all the latest news: https://t.me/sputniknewsus