Ukraine used and abandoned by Biden
Although the Ukrainian army has shown surprisingly strong resistance against Russia's three-way invasion of Ukraine, it will be extremely difficult for Ukrainian forces to break through and drive out Russian forces unless reinforcements arrive.
On 6 March, President Zelensky himself distributed a video in which he stated that the Vinnytsia military airfield had been destroyed by eight missiles. "We will not be saved unless the Western countries set up a no-fly zone over our country, eliminate Russian missiles and aircraft, and provide us with military aircraft. Do you want us to be slowly killed?" he cried out sadly. However, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) refused to establish a no-fly zone or to provide military aircraft.
In short, neither NATO's European countries nor Biden's US wanted to fight directly against the military powerhouse Russia, even though they would provide weapons to Ukraine. The only thing abandoned Ukraine could do was to recruit mercenaries.
If neither NATO nor the US came to its aid, it would have to face the overwhelming military power of its enemies alone. This could well be the fate of Taiwan and Japan in the near future. We should recognize that we have indeed reached a historical turning point.
Ukraine's pro-US government, which came into power after the political changes of 2014, was used and disciplined no end by the Obama-Biden administration. Ukrainian oligarchs also gave plenty of money to Hunter and Joe Biden. After all that, when Russia finally attacked Ukraine, Biden abandoned it. But in fact, the agreement known as the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances was signed 20 years before that.
Ukraine was the third largest nuclear power in the world
The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances was signed by Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) conference in the Hungarian capital Budapest on 5 December 1994, following their accession to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and it was also signed by the three signatories to the agreement, Russia, the USA and the UK. It was a matter of providing those three former Soviet states with security over territory and sovereignty by Russia, the USA and the UK. China and France made similar agreements in separate written documents.
In other words, the nuclear-armed states told these former Soviet states that still possessed Soviet-era nuclear weapons, " if you give up your nuclear weapons, we will be responsible for protecting you. We will assure your territory and independence". At the time, Ukraine in particular had a large number of Soviet-era nuclear weapons remaining and was the third largest nuclear power in the world.
Ukraine handed over its nuclear weapons to Russia on request and carried out significant disarmament. Glenko Andriy, a Ukrainian political scientist who was with me on one of our programs, said that everyone at that time believed that there would be no more major wars and that they would not be invaded.
If these nuclear-armed states - permanent members of the UN Security Council - were serious about peace, they should have retained Ukraine as a complete buffer zone under the 'Budapest Memorandum'. However, when the pro-US government that emerged from the US-backed political changes in 2014 decided to expel Russia's Black Sea Fleet, an angry Putin annexed Crimea. Seeing this, the pro-Russian population in the east demanded secession, leading to conflict and the formation of the Minsk Agreement in 2015, with the UK and France as guardians. At this point, the Budapest Memorandum had practically collapsed. The full-scale invasion by Russia has now completely blown up the entire Minsk Agreement.
Ukraine, which had disarmed itself, was eventually literally destroyed by the imperialism of the major powers. The deceit of the Great Powers in failing to maintain a buffer zone where it should have been a buffer zone deserves strong criticism.
What is the difference with Ukraine?
The problem, however, is the fact that nobody came to the rescue. Ukraine handed over their nuclear weapons and disarmed themselves with the promise of security and independence, but no one has come to their rescue, despite their loud cries for help. The countries that are supposed to be their allies tell them that they will supply them with weapons and ammunition and that Ukraine should fight the good fight on their own. But the more Ukraine resists, the more frustrated Russia gets in a vicious circle of using more powerful weapons.
Why won't anyone help Ukraine? It is obvious. Neither the US nor NATO wants to fight a stronger opponent. Will a UN force be formed? The permanent members of the Security Council can't talk about it because Russia, one of its member states, started a war of aggression on its own. The UNSC is completely dysfunctional. Of course, there are fears that a direct fight against Russia would lead to a third world war.
One thing is now clear. The US, or at least the Biden administration, has no intention of fighting China head-on in East Asia. Now that this has become clear, the fear that the Ukrainian pattern will be replicated in East Asia has increased. Of course, the invader replacing Russia is China, and the victims of the invasion are Taiwan and Japan.
What is the difference with Ukraine?
Unlike Ukraine, Taiwan is a far smaller island nation. However, whereas the Ukrainians did not expect a full-scale invasion, Taiwan sees a Chinese attack as a realistic threat, with Taiwan's Foreign Affairs Minister Joseph Wu stating that 'the power gap with China is obvious, but we will carry out asymmetric warfare'. (ABC Australia, 5 October 2021) Although there is no security treaty between the US and Taiwan, the US has the Taiwan Relations Act, sends military advisers to Taiwan and actively provides arms to Taiwan.
China will launch a large-scale cyber-attack, as Russia did this time, and then launch ballistic missiles. However, a considerably fierce ground war is expected to occupy Taiwan. Even if the US military does not directly participate in the battle, blockading the Strait of Malacca would have a tremendous impact on China's economy, and discontent and confusion within China would rise dramatically. The same applies to the economic sanctions that would be imposed from all over the world.
Therefore, while an invasion of Taiwan would be a very risky adventure for China, if Russia completes its objectives in Ukraine, China may well be tempted to take action itself while the Biden regime is the weakest in American history. No, they may already be planning to do so.
Extremely dangerous, Senkaku Islands
On the other hand, a direct attack on the Japanese mainland, including Okinawa, is not realistic for Japan, as US military bases are located throughout the country under the Japan-US Security Treaty. This is where Japan differs significantly from Ukraine.
However, it is the Senkaku Islands situation that I consider extremely dangerous. What would happen if China dared to focus its invasion on the Senkaku Islands alone? The US military will never come to the rescue. There is no way that the US military will directly engage the Chinese military in battle to defend the uninhabited Senkaku Islands and deplete its personnel, when it will not help Ukraine.
Biden has made statements to the effect that American soldiers will not shed blood for a country that does not fight for its own defense. The US Government does not officially recognize the Senkaku Islands as Japanese territory, and if it recognizes them as disputed territory, there would be no dispatch of US troops, even more so. US public opinion would not support sending troops. The average American has no idea where the Senkaku Islands are.
Meanwhile, successive Japanese administrations have been happy to confirm to the US Government that the Senkaku Islands are included in Article 5 of the US-Japan Security Treaty. What is Article 5 of the Japan-US Security Treaty?
Article 5 : Each State Party acknowledges that an armed attack on either side in the territory under the administration of the State of Japan would endanger its own peace and security and declares that it shall act to deal with the common danger in accordance with its own constitutional provisions and procedures.
This Article 5 is generally understood as obliging the US to defend Japan, but it can be interpreted to mean that if either side is attacked, they will jointly deal with the attack as a common threat, i.e. invoking their right to collective self-defense.
Therefore, in the event of a Chinese invasion of the Senkaku Islands, Japan would naturally undertake its own defense efforts and the US would cooperate. The Article 5 does not say that the US will fight on its own initiative or that Japan will assist the US in the frontal fight from the rear. If the uninhabited Senkaku Islands are invaded, the US is likely to provide only some assistance. The US Democrats will spread a domestic argument against deploying troops to defend the uninhabited reef zone or participating in the fighting, and the mainstream media and big tech will spread it too. This is even more so if China declares that it will not attack US forces unless the US military interferes.
Japan's very survival is at stake
However, if the Senkaku Islands fall into Chinese hands, it would pose a major threat to both Japan and Taiwan. China would swiftly begin to militarize the Senkaku Islands, as it has done in the South China Sea. It will then take a more hardline stance towards Japan, showing a readiness to blockade the sea lanes at any time while increasing its capability to attack Taiwan.
How will Biden's America react? In the worst-case scenario, the US, which never wants to fight China, may negotiate conditions with China such as 'no obstruction of sea lanes' and retreat to the second or third island chain. This would mean the end of US global hegemony. Japan will be desperate to retain US military bases in the country, while China will order its pro-China Japanese politicians to pressure for the dissolution of the Japan-US Security Treaty.
The US, meanwhile, is expected to encourage Japan to either arm itself with nuclear weapons or jointly possess US nuclear weapons (nuclear sharing), and to downgrade its own military commitments while encouraging Japan to defend itself. When this happens, either Japan will finally decide to get its stomach up in gear and fight a community-of-fate defense war with Taiwan, or it will suffer a military invasion from China while delaying its decision and suffer the same fate as Ukraine.
Japan must defend itself without relying on anyone else. Ukraine is showing us the consequences of a country that fails to show this determination and leaves its own security to foreign countries. Japan's very survival is at stake.
