Tim Kirby
Stephen Kinzer's book presents a well-organized autopsy of the terrible foreign policy decisions that have led us to the bloody war in Ukraine and verge of nuclear apocalypse, especially from the American side
Did Vladimir Putin just wake up one day on the wrong side of the bed and decide to invade Ukraine in February of 2022 or is there a lot more to this single decision that has been reshaping the 21st century geopolitical landscape ? Obviously, from the way that I just posed the question you can see that I am on the side that views the causes for the war in Ukraine to be very deep, long-term, historical and consciously nefarious, and most importantly, not from within the halls of the Kremlin. So it was a pleasure to take a look at the book "Boiling Point, How America Brought War to Ukraine" by author Stephen Kinzer, who like myself, also believes that the real reasons behind military conflicts around the world are not what CNN and the BBC have been telling you. The main thesis of this book was stated clearly by its creator; the war "may have been illegal, but it was definitely not unprovoked."
Financing terror with American wealth since 1945
The thing that unites terrorists, journalists, and activists is that they all have to be financed by 'someone' in order to keep their activities going. Kinzer rightfully points out that the terror acts of Stepan Bandera, and others of his ilk, right after WWII, used for the vague goal of destabilizing the USSR, were only worth the American money if one wanted to usher in a Cold War. It is true that at the time communist revolutionary action was still a hot commodity. Right after the big war ended there would be a whole wave of mid-century red revolutions, and thus the USA did need to defend itself from a similar fate. But did financing Bandera actually provide this defense, or instead did it only justify commie terror against the capitalists even more so?
It is important to note that the Russians often refer to the post Maidan regime in Kiev as the "Banderite Regime" because this one particular mass murderer of civilians sits atop the pantheon of Ukrainian heroes. Bandera could have been left to history as one of many ugly faces that sided with Hitler and committed atrocities, but sadly, Washington chose to keep the PR campaign for this figure going for nearly a century now. Ukrainian nationalism has always been a well-financed tool to be used against Russia, and that is why old murderous Stevie gets a lot of hype and peaceful poets do not. Ukrainian nationalism that is not to be used as cannon fodder against the Kremlin has no value to Washington.
This doubling down on celebrating Hitler's terrorists as national heroes is one of the reasons why, beyond pragmatic 'demilitarization', the Kremlin has wanted 'denazificiation' of Ukraine since the very beginning of the Special Military Operation. This is not a factor of "everyone I don't like is a Nazi" but an actual core factor in Putin's decision making. It is critically important that the author of Boiling Point put major focus on the financing of terror against Russia for generations without any long-term logic that could be justified to the American people who paid for it.
The Cold War should have ended in 1991
Boiling Point exceptionally sheds light onto the fact that NATO expansion was a cause for the war in Ukraine that almost everyone saw coming, even in the West. Since the end of the Cold War in 1991 all of the Kremlin's pleas to keep NATO far from its borders were ignored. And, by 2008 it had already been mostly decided that Ukraine and Georgia were going to be prepped to become alliance members.
If one views the West as the benevolent bringer of prosperity, democracy, puppies and rainbows then NATO expansion should not have been seen as a threat. However, the Russians saw Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya etc. all being blown to bits by the benevolent ones for dubious reasons. Kinzer does a good job of expressing how the Kremlin saw all of these NATO expansions as a massive growing threat that was being designed to ultimately and finally destroy Russia and Russians entirely. The whole 'Biolab' network and now 'Torture Chamber' scandal are very strong evidence that the Russians were correct on this point. The fact that numerous Western politicians have claimed that the war in Ukraine is good because Russia is being weakened while NATO troops are not dying (in large numbers) is a great thing from a cost/benefit analysis standpoint, only proves Kinzer's point completely.
All color revolutions are stained by foreign influence
Perhaps 30 years ago in a pre-internet world we could be logically so naïve as to see color revolutions as being as natural of a phenomenon as rain or a sunset, but the times have changed. As I often say in my public speeches, "people don't rise up themselves, they are risen up by outside forces" and the various revolutions in Ukraine are no exception. Oliver Stone's "Ukraine on Fire" provides an excellent break down of just how the ironically named Revolution of Dignity, or in common parlance The Maidan, was orchestrated and executed by the West including Washington. Boiling Point also includes material about this critical aspect of why the War in Ukraine started, if there wasn't money being pumped into a nationalist anti-Russian revolution in Kiev, things would have remained the way they were; calm and neutral. But then again, over time perhaps a 'Resurgent Russia' could have begun to drag Ukraine back home with soft power. That was something the Russophobes in the West could not accept under any circumstances. Supposedly, one criticism of Boiling Point is that it gives the Ukrainian side themselves, including the masses, no agency in these broad historical events. This criticism must come from a highly biased or extremely naïve schmuck, for countries do not commit suicide and act in direct contrast to their national interest when they have agency.
Biden could have negotiated, but didn't
In December of 2021 the Russians submitted a list of demands for consideration in terms of how to redraw the security architecture of Europe. This was done in theory to make everyone happy and avoid war. As history notes Team Biden and their mighty Autopen unilaterally rejected every one of the Kremlin's points without even discussing them or providing an explanation. The global hegemon does not negotiate with oil-pumping aboriginals, and thus the final chance for peace was thrown into the dumpster of history thanks to our good old friend hubris. Ironically, it looks like the exact same Kremlin security talking points are at least being humored and discussed by the American side as we speak. Potentially two million lives have been lost and many more millions displaced all for this whole theatre of the absurd to come full circle, right back to the discussions that should have happened in December, 2021.
A good thorough read
Boiling Point, How America Brought War to Ukraine by Stephen Kinzer presents a well-organized autopsy of the terrible foreign policy decisions that have led us to the bloody war in Ukraine and verge of nuclear apocalypse, especially from the American side. This book really explains to the reader what the media consciously does not. Give it a try.