How Anglo-American stand on Ukraine war resembles closely to 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq

Earlier in March, Chinese President Xi Jinping and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin jointly delivered a speech in which they urged “peace negotiations” and “responsible involvement” about Ukraine. Yet, Xinping also denounced sanctions, attributed the war to NATO’s expansion, and made no commitment to withdraw occupation soldiers.   This could be a prospective reprisal to American President Joe Biden’s surprise visit to Ukraine in early February, shortly before the anniversary of Vladimir Putin’s invasion, and to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s historic visit to London in the same month, where Prime Minister Rishi Sunak received him amid heavy security. The NATO office in Moscow was closed after an incident in October 2021 that led to the expulsion of eight Russian officials from the organisation’s Brussels headquarters. As a result, Russia ceased its participation in NATO. The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine brought NATO-Russia ties to their lowest point since the Cold War, and the NATO-Russia Council was abolished as a result. The 2022 NATO Madrid summit referred to Russia as “a direct threat to Euro-Atlantic security.” In the meantime, NATO has refuted Russian officials’ and propagandists’ claims that they are “at war” with the whole alliance. After Russia’s acquisition of Ukraine’s southern and eastern regions, Ukraine formally submitted its application to join NATO on September 30, 2022. Following this, NATO’s escalating involvement in Ukraine, via the United States and the United Kingdom, could turn it into a NATO proxy against Russia. This could serve as a precursor to domestic unrest ahead of elections in the United States in 2024 and the United Kingdom in 2025, respectively, and could be a repeat of the invasion of Iraq that was ordered two decades ago. Even if the verdict is left to others, George Bush and Tony Blair will forever be connected to the conflict that will determine their position in history. According to President Bush’s re-election and increasing vote share in 2004, the Iraq War was either electorally insignificant or beneficial to him. Notwithstanding the losses from the Iraq War, he performed better than he did in 2000. It does not follow that these defeats would have had no political impact on Bush in 2004. If the War had never begun, unexpected changes would have occurred in the world. So, it is likely that the War had an impact on President Bush’s 2004 presidential campaign. With Ukraine, Joe Biden wants to accomplish the same. Most of the talking points that were essential to the argument for the Iraq war were reiterated by him. Biden supported the war but later denied doing so, claiming that he was merely supporting George W. Bush’s diplomacy. Although his handling of the war in Ukraine may be the real test, he occasionally appears to have learnt from his errors in Iraq. Biden has been pressured to maintain his anti-Putin stance for the government that would succeed him after Donald Trump argued that cutting off military supplies to Ukraine and backing negotiations that may be led by the United States would resolve the war. Meanwhile, Rishi Sunak, who is aiming to reintegrate his party into mainstream and has a glossy speaking style similar to the past Labour leadership, is attempting to position himself as a master of technical efficacy. Similar to how the Conservative Party was subsequently engulfed by the Iraq War, Labour has shown support for the Conservatives in Ukraine. The leader of Labour, Keir Starmer, met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr  Zelenskyy to reaffirm Labour’s commitment to supporting actions to arm the country against a continuation of a Russian invasion. Less than 25 per cent of voters supported Blair in the 2005 election, yet he nonetheless won and there is little doubt that the 2005 election will be referred to as the Iraq election.  In light of the internal strife within the Conservative Party and the fact that former Prime Minister Boris Johnson visited Kviv in January and represents a much greater threat to Sunak than Labour, Sunak may see the same prospects like Blair in Ukraine.   The choice of Jeremy Corbyn as the Labour Party’s leader following the Iraq war and his expulsion from the party during the Ukraine crisis are tangled consequences. Corbyn, who opposed the war in Iraq, has asked western nations to avoid arming Ukraine, arguing that doing so will only make the conflict worse. Biden’s trip to Ukraine was the first trip to a combat area in his capacity as President. He discreetly slipped away from Joint Base Andrews near Washington, stopping at the German air base of Ramstein before heading into Ukraine. It happened when Putin ordered Russian forces to advance in a spring offensive at several points along the front line, which was a pivotal occurrence in the conflict. The White House reported that Mr Biden was also announcing additional penalties against Russia and $500 million (£416 million) in military supplies for Ukraine, notably cannon ammunition, anti-armour weapons, and air surveillance radars. The Ukrainian President paid Joe Biden a visit to the White House in December, marking his first trip outside his country since the start of the conflict. Other Western politicians have travelled to Kyiv since the start of the conflict, most notably German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and French President Emmanuel Macron. Notwithstanding the country’s economic woes, the UK has provided Kyiv with the most substantial military support in the West. On his November visit to Kyiv, Mr Sunak also stated that the UK would expand its military assistance programme to include training Ukrainian pilots to operate planes and marines to NATO standards. Rishi Sunak viewed Zelenskyy’s first trip to the UK following Vladimir Putin’s invasion last February as a monument to his nation’s bravery, tenacity, and fight and to the unshakable connection between Russia and the UK. Zelenskyy’s visit to the UK was only his second international tour since the invasion. Ukraine’s first NATO ally to provide it with contemporary Western battle tanks was the UK.   Following the British action, Germany consented to provide Leopard tanks to Ukraine and gave other allies the go-ahead to deliver these German-made versions. The US has also promised to supply Abrams tanks even if their delivery can take a while. Ukraine received solid western support based on the belief that it must win. Although a lot has changed since then, it hasn’t lessened. Russian territory has been taken back by Ukrainian military forces. Western tanks are approaching. Zelenskyy has only visited foreign countries twice since the invasion, and both of those trips were to the UK and the USA because those countries have taken the initiative in giving Ukraine’s defence political, financial, and military support ostensibly intended to placate their own political landscape.   There is more to the visits than just symbolism. As the leader of an independent state, Zelenskyy is fighting for liberty and the right to self-determination. Nothing could be more significant to NATO partners, the United States and the United Kingdom, who have commanded the international political theatre at the whim of regional wars spanning from the Middle East to South Asia. In the turmoil following the withdrawal from Afghanistan, Ukraine has emerged as a subject that is congruent with the interests of the US and the UK. For this reason, the idea that Ukraine might find support in the UK and the US is a contentious aspect of the situation. Undoubtedly, the Ukraine situation will influence the UK and US elections. The invasion of Iraq was a show of power by the Bush and Blair regimes. The Biden and Sunak administration is going towards Zelenskyy in a similar way to present its stance on the unsteady Russia-China axis. An immediate and conclusive triumph in the centre of the former USSR province would send a message to all countries, especially to resistance-minded governments like Russia and China, that American and British hegemony has arrived in Ukraine and is here to stay. Simply put, the current events in the Ukrainian conflict are driven by a desire to reestablish NATO led by the United States and the United Kingdom as the dominant force on the globe. Importantly, though, Afghanistan and the Middle East were insufficient because the countries were too fragile. Bullies in prison are aware that humiliating the least powerful members of the group in the yard does not build a fearsome reputation. The author is a postgraduate scholar at SOAS University of London. Views expressed are personal. Read all the  Latest News,  Trending News,  Cricket News,  Bollywood News, India News and  Entertainment News here. Follow us on  Facebook,  Twitter and  Instagram.