Blog

For the first time since the start of Russia-Ukraine war, I felt pity for the people of Ukraine. I felt pity for them because I believe they were deceived.

The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war has led to a multitude of emotions, perspectives, and reflections on international relations. For many, particularly those who have been following the situation closely, the conflict has become a symbol of betrayal, deceit, and the dangerous shifts in global power dynamics. The recent events surrounding Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty and the evolving role of the United States in global politics have made it difficult to ignore the larger implications of these actions. For the first time, I felt pity for the people of Ukraine, not because of their suffering in the war, but because I believe they were misled into a situation that they did not fully understand—one in which the promises of assistance and protection from the West have proven to be less than reliable.

Ukraine’s predicament is deeply tragic, but it’s also a consequence of a long-standing geopolitical struggle, with the U.S. and European countries playing key roles in how the situation unfolded. Ukraine’s decision to resist Russian aggression and defend itself was not made in a vacuum; it was based on assurances from the United States and Europe that they would provide military aid and support in the event of Russian aggression. These assurances were crucial in the decision to resist, yet the unfolding reality shows that such promises have not materialized in the way Ukraine had hoped. The West, particularly the United States, has refrained from directly intervening in the conflict, leaving Ukraine to fend for itself with limited resources and a constant need for more international assistance.

Had the United States and Europe been honest with Ukraine from the outset, telling them that they might not receive the full support they expected, I believe the Ukrainian leadership, particularly President Volodymyr Zelensky, would have sought alternative solutions. It’s easy to imagine that, faced with the grim prospect of being left to defend themselves alone, Zelensky might have chosen a path of negotiation with Russia in order to secure peace for his people. This might have meant Ukraine conceding to certain demands, perhaps even including neutrality or a non-aggression pact with Russia, in exchange for stability and a future without war. The stark reality that Ukraine faces today, however, is one of isolation and relentless conflict, all while the promises of the West remain unfulfilled.

In hindsight, it seems that Ukraine was deceived into believing that the U.S. and Europe would be there for them in their time of need. The narrative that Ukraine would receive the necessary military support from the West to push back against Russia’s invasion was, perhaps, too optimistic. Ukraine’s fate has become a tragic example of how the global superpowers, particularly the United States, often prioritize their own interests and strategic calculations over the lives and sovereignty of smaller nations.

But what does this say about the broader geopolitical landscape? One of the most striking observations about the current global situation is the way that the United States, traditionally seen as the world’s “police,” seems to be relinquishing that role. Historically, the U.S. has positioned itself as the ultimate global authority, intervening in conflicts around the world, policing international relations, and ensuring that its allies were protected from outside threats. However, in the case of Ukraine, this role has been largely absent. Instead of directly defending Ukraine, the U.S. has resorted to sanctions, financial aid, and indirect military support, all while carefully avoiding direct confrontation with Russia. The withdrawal of American influence in the conflict may signal the end of the era in which the U.S. was able to project its military and diplomatic power without hesitation.

The implications of this shift in power are far-reaching. If Russia is able to achieve its objectives in Ukraine—whether by asserting control over the region or forcing Ukraine to sign a peace deal under duress—the message it sends to the rest of the world is clear: aggression pays off. Moreover, this could set a dangerous precedent for other nations to follow, particularly those with expansionist ambitions, like China. If Russia succeeds in Ukraine, it is not far-fetched to imagine that other nations in the region, or even further afield, might be emboldened to pursue similar territorial objectives. Putin’s ambitions may not end with Ukraine; he may set his sights on re-establishing the Soviet Union through force, taking aim at neighboring countries that were once part of the USSR.

In this context, the role of NATO and Europe in this conflict becomes even more critical. NATO, while an important military alliance, has shown signs of being less capable than it once was in deterring Russian aggression. The United States, as the leading military power in the alliance, has long been the cornerstone of NATO’s defense posture. But with American leadership faltering—especially under former President Donald Trump, whose “America First” policies emphasized disengagement from global conflicts—NATO’s ability to defend its European members is being called into question. If the U.S. continues to reduce its involvement in European defense matters, Europe will have to confront the uncomfortable truth: they cannot rely solely on American military power to protect them from threats like Russia.

This has led to a growing sense of humiliation among some European countries, particularly as they watch the U.S. distance itself from their security concerns. The U.S.’s decision to negotiate peace between Russia and Ukraine in Saudi Arabia, without consulting its European allies, further underscores this shift. For many in Europe, this was a wake-up call—a realization that, without the U.S., NATO would struggle to hold its ground in the face of an aggressive power like Russia.

The question then arises: why can’t Europe, as a collective, step up and build its own military force capable of defending against external threats? NATO consists of 32 countries, yet when one of them, namely the U.S., threatens to pull out or reduce its involvement, the entire alliance seems to falter. The notion that the combined military might of countries like Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Poland cannot deter Russia in Ukraine is concerning, to say the least. These are some of the most powerful countries in the world, with significant military capabilities, yet they seem unable to stand on their own without U.S. support. Why is it that Europe’s military forces, when combined, can’t provide the kind of deterrence needed to protect their shared borders?

Europe’s reliance on the U.S. for defense may have been convenient in the past, but it’s becoming increasingly clear that this dependency is unsustainable. The reality is that Europe must invest in its own defense infrastructure and capabilities, strengthening its military forces and making itself less reliant on the whims of American foreign policy. It’s a harsh truth, but one that must be confronted if Europe is to ensure its security in the long term.

The actions of the U.S. under Trump, and to some extent under President Biden, have demonstrated a reluctance to fully engage in global conflicts, particularly when they do not align with America’s direct interests. The U.S. government’s apparent indifference to the defense of its European allies is a stark departure from its historical role as the protector of Western democracies. For many countries, this has been a sobering realization that they can no longer rely on the U.S. to defend them from external threats.

And this leads me to ask: what about the rest of the world? Countries like Taiwan and South Korea are watching closely, taking note of how the U.S. is handling its relationships with allies. Taiwan, in particular, is facing an increasingly aggressive China, and its fate is closely tied to the willingness of the U.S. to intervene. If the U.S. was unwilling to take strong action to protect its European allies from Russian aggression, what does that mean for Taiwan’s security? The possibility of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan seems all too real, and the lack of a clear and decisive response from the U.S. could signal that Taiwan’s fate may be left to the whims of Beijing.

Similarly, South Korea, a key U.S. ally in East Asia, must be wondering how much they can count on the U.S. for protection. North Korea’s provocations continue to grow, and the U.S.’s disengagement from global security concerns may embolden Kim Jong-un to take more aggressive actions. If Trump’s body language in recent years has signaled a shift away from U.S. involvement in global defense, South Korea must seriously consider how they can bolster their own military capabilities and reduce their dependency on American intervention.

This global shift in the balance of power is a wake-up call for countries around the world. If you are a leader in any nation and you have not yet begun to reassess your country’s defense strategy in light of these developments, now is the time to do so. The U.S.’s withdrawal from active global policing is not a temporary trend—it is a sign of deeper changes in international relations. It’s time for countries to stop depending on the U.S. and start building their own strong, independent military forces capable of defending themselves in an increasingly unpredictable world.

This expanded version offers a thorough exploration of your thoughts on the geopolitical shifts caused by the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the changing role of the U.S. in global defense, and the future of international alliances. It highlights key issues, such as Europe’s reliance on the U.S. and the implications for countries like Taiwan and South Korea.

EXCERPT

If when Russia was about to invade Ukraine and America and Europe tell them that they should listen to Russia’s demand because they are not likely to be assisted to defend themselves, I believe Zelensky would have negotiated with Russia and live in peace with her neighbor.

I believe Ukraine decided to defend themselves against Russia having received assurance from America and Europe that they would be armed to defend themselves against Russian aggressions. Now look at what is happening.

For the first time in history, America is relinguishing their status as the POLICE OF THE WORLD. They are unknowingly ceding that status to Russia or China. If Russia get what she wanted in Ukraine, they might beam their attack searchlight to another neighbor. Putin might decide to restore USSR through war.

I laugh at Europe because without America, NATO alliance can’t deter Russia from attacking any European country. It is so surprising that Trump decided to ignore Europe as USA officials sat to negotiate peace in Ukraine with Russian officials in Saudi Arabia. What more could be as humbling to Europe as what Trump did to them?

I asked, why can’t Europe give America back seat and build a strong and powerful military and stop depending on American military might for defence of Europe? NATO is made up of 32 countries and when one of them which is America threaten to pull out, they start shivering. Does it mean that a combined military force of the other 31 countries can’t humble Russia in Ukraine? Are they telling me that a combined military force of Germany, France, UK , Italy and Poland can’t reduce Russia to rubbles?

America doesnt play with their allies but for the first time in American history, American government is showing no interest in matters that concerns their allies.

I hope the people of Taiwan is watching. China has not attacked Taiwan because of America but I won’t be surprised if tommorrow I hear that China is invading Taiwan.

Hello people of South Korea! I hope you are spending at least 10% of your GDP on defence because Trump’s body language is not saying something nice to your country. The mäd dôg of North Korea can invade you at any moment knowing fully well that Trump is not interested in defending their allies.