Follow us on social

Shutterstock_2100123910-scaled

What Zelensky will say to Congress and how the US should respond

Don't repeat the shameful history of Georgia in 2008, where Washington made quasi-promises of military aid it had no intention of fulfilling.

Analysis | Europe

All eyes are on Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zalensky as he is scheduled to address a joint session of Congress Wednesday via video link at the U.S. Capitol. 

It is expected that he will make a broad and strident call for more assistance in fending off further Russian incursions in his country. Among the requests, Zelensky is expected to repeat his call for NATO to impose a no-fly zone. This  must be resisted. It would mean U.S. planes going into action against Russia — in effect, standing in as the Ukrainian air force. They would be shot down by Russian anti-aircraft missile batteries stationed on Russian soil, which have the range to cover much of Ukraine. 

Furthermore, if the U.S. responded by attacking those batteries, Russia would most probably fire missiles at American air bases in Poland and other NATO members. Do we really want the two largest nuclear powers, with the ability to wipe out humanity, to start firing missiles at each other?

Zelensky’s demands to supply fighter jets should also be rejected. Given Russian air superiority, they would be quickly shot down without doing much good. The present Western supplies of shoulder-fired anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles are in fact exactly what the Ukrainian forces need for urban warfare, are doing great damage to the Russian forces, and should be continued. There is no need for escalation.

As argued in two op-eds in the Washington Post today, sooner or later this war will end in a compromise peace in which Moscow will have to give up its maximal aims but Ukraine will also have to make certain concessions. Complete Russian victory or complete Russian defeat are both equally unlikely. The Biden administration therefore needs to talk intensively with President Zelensky about the possible terms of such a peace agreement.

As I have written before, U.S. and Western sanctions should be used to support the peace process and compel Russia to end its aggression and reach an agreement, not to bring about regime change in Russia. Otherwise the war in Ukraine and the resulting global economic crisis will go on for many years, with terrible damage and unpredictable consequences.

The Biden administration and all responsible members of Congress should tell Zelensky honestly that he cannot expect Washington to go to war with Russia. There is a shameful history going back to Georgia in 2008 of Americans making quasi-promises of military aid that they had no real intention of ever fulfilling, thereby encouraging countries to take disastrously uncompromising positions.


Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky in Dec. 2021. (Alexandros Michailidis/Shutterstock)
Analysis | Europe
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.