Part of her speech included this contentious line: “So, I will say what I know we all say, and I will say over and over again: The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO alliance.”
So, the word “and” was inserted into both the transcript and the tweet. They both now read: “The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people [and] in defense of the NATO alliance,” thus making them two separate issues.
Similar concerns about her grasp of the complexities of the situation in Europe were raised when she flew to Germany to address the annual Munich Security Conference, held Feb. 18–20.
But what if there was no typing error in her DNC speech or tweet and that the original wording is exactly what she believes or wants?
Despite the buildup of troops, he saw no reason to panic and told foreign correspondents, “I can’t be like other politicians who are grateful to the United States just for being the United States.” He added: “I am the Ukrainian president. I’m located here. I know … deeper details than any president.”
Then, when his country was invaded, Zelensky did indeed have to turn to America for help. Last week, he told Congress: “I’m grateful to President Biden for that. I am grateful for the leadership that has united the democratic world.”
That resulted in Ukraine handing over its huge arsenal of nuclear weapons to Russia after the breakup of the Soviet Union, which paid them compensation for the uranium, while the United States covered the costs of dismantling the launch silos. James Baker, who was then U.S. secretary of state, believed Russia was the safest place for them to prevent the collapsing Soviet Union from becoming what he described as a “Yugoslavia with nukes.”
Bush agreed that the United States would provide assistance if Ukraine became “the object of aggression or of threats of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.” Second, he urged Ukraine to participate in the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC), and the United Nations. Thirdly, he stressed the importance of democratic political transition, economic reform, and investment to help guarantee Ukraine’s security.
Finally, he offered U.S. assistance in the development of Ukraine’s conventional armed forces “whose size, equipment, and doctrine contribute to the security of Ukraine and stability in the region.” The United States has honored that by continuing to train and arm Ukrainian forces.
Ironically, or perhaps wisely, the U.S. refusal to provide security through a legally binding treaty has become Bush’s unwritten fifth security guarantee, and which has stood for almost 30 years. For as long as Ukraine remained outside of NATO, it posed no threat to Russia.
But, just three weeks after downplaying the Russian threat and chastising Western leaders for exaggeration, Zelensky now chose to confront Moscow publicly.
It seems inconceivable that he would have made such a momentous announcement without consulting his major ally, just as it is inconceivable that he would risk crossing Putin’s red line without having some assurance of support.
Before delivering his speech, he held a private meeting with Harris and afterward, they held a joint press conference in which she once again pledged U.S. support for Ukraine.
There was no explicit mention of nukes, but Russia certainly took his threat seriously, judging that he couldn’t have made such a bold announcement without having at least preliminary discussions with the United States.
Putin responded by saying: “This is a real threat not just to our interests, but to the very existence of our state, its sovereignty—this is the very red line that has been talked about many times. They crossed it.”
“Either we are part of an alliance like NATO and make our contribution to strengthen this Europe, or we have only one option: to rearm ourselves,“ Melnyk said. ”How else can we guarantee our defense?” He was referring to non-conventional weapons.
So, what caused Russia to launch its attack now and not then?
While a radio interview given by an ambassador is one thing, when the Ukrainian president chooses a major security conference—in the company of the U.S. vice president—to announce his desire to break a 28-year-old agreement and join NATO, perhaps Moscow feared the process was already in place and the clock was ticking.