Initially, I was pleased that Trump (even though I dislike him) refused to call for Ukraine to defeat Russia during Tuesday’s presidential debate. But after thinking carefully about both candidates’ positions, I realized that they are both warmongers, but in different positions.
The Biden administration stood idly by as Ukraine invaded Russian territory. Kamala Harris agrees. Now, Washington is floating the idea of a deep strike against Russia. Not only does this push us to the brink of nuclear confrontation, but it also prompts Russia to escalate its air strikes in Ukraine, with devastating consequences for civilians. The Biden administration and Zelensky may care less. Unless Kamala Harris dissociates herself from these policies, she will be just as responsible as Biden for the waste of American tax dollars and the suffering caused by war. Biden didn’t lift a finger in support of a negotiated solution that would happen sooner or later. The real strategy behind Biden’s policies is to weaken Russia militarily, weaken Putin politically, and isolate Russia from the rest of Europe. These goals come at a huge cost, both economically and in human lives.
Trump has called for a resolution to the conflict, but his road map is to preserve U.S. authority. We are the bullies on the block and all parties must listen to us. But what happens if they don’t? What happens if Washington’s proposed negotiated solution is rejected by Moscow? As a strongman, President Trump will ultimately threaten Moscow or we will appear weak. But what will happen if Moscow does not step down? This is brinkmanship, a dangerous game, and it is this brinksmanship that underpins Trump’s foreign policy. This is exactly why I voted for Jill Stein.
