Is Trump Throwing Ukraine Under the Bus or Making Just Demands?

“The rich have eaten your future and your poor have given them the food” ― John le Carré, The Spy Who Came in from the Cold

One-time or recurring donations can be made at Ko-Fi.

I STILL do not have a voice! I promise to record this when it comes back.

"When men and women are rewarded for greed, greed becomes a corrupting motivator. When we equate the gluttonous consumption of the earth's resources with a status approaching sainthood, when we teach our children to emulate people who live unbalanced lives, and when we define huge sections of the population as subservient to an elite minority, we ask for trouble. And we get it." ~ Confessions of an Economic Hit Man

I was looking back over essays I wrote about Ukraine, and I thought I should republish this one because it gives comprehensive insight into how the United States imbeds itself in foreign countries through foreign aid and partnerships, and the role spies play in that process. Just to catch up on where we are currently before we dive into this essay:

President Trump wants an end to the war in Ukraine. He has called Zelensky out as a dictator. But Zelensky has always been more puppet than dictator. Zelensky says he will resign if it brings peace, but only if Ukraine becomes a NATO member. I suppose he has to say this to save face, but I doubt he has much hope of that ever happening.

Trump is a deal maker. On February 3rd, he said. “We’re looking to do a deal with Ukraine, where they’re going to secure what we’re giving them with their rare earth and other things.”

Trump’s proposal didn’t go down well with European leaders. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz criticized it as “very selfish.”

I guess Germany wants their piece of Ukraine, too, even though, as Trump says, they never gave enough to deserve it. To the winner goes the spoils, right? The winners will be the United States and Russia, because that’s the only way the war will end.

What most people don’t know is that “Trump’s rare earths deal” was actually proposed by Zelensky back in September 2024. Zelensky presented the plan to then President Joe Biden as well as to presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Ukraine is particularly rich in minerals such as titanium, graphite, lithium, and uranium. The New York Times reported that the Zelenskiy and Biden governments were close to signing an agreement to exploit these deposits at the end of 2024, but the Ukrainian side put the brakes on it in order to wait for the incoming Trump administration.

By the way, it is interesting to note that there is nothing new in this. After World War II, the United States didn’t require reparations from Germany, however it did require repayment from its allies of more than $10 billion.

Europe attempted to get reparations from Germany but then came the Great Depression, Germany defaulting on its loans from US banks, and by mid-1933, all European debtor nations except Finland had defaulted on their loans from the United States.

So, for the United States to be repaid in rare earth minerals is not a bad idea. However, the difference between the two wars is that Hitler clearly did start World War II while the United States underhandedly encouraged the war in Ukraine, precisely for the reasons discussed here.

And not to put too much of a damper on it, but I'm not sure how this peace deal will translate into ordinary Americans being paid back the billions they were required to give to Ukraine. Rather, it will mean huge contracts for corporations, for the tech billionaires, etc., who use the rare earth minerals to make the products that we, the taxpayers, then pay for because, you know, we can no longer live without them.

Just as weapons manufacturers grow rich off of war, we will see who grows rich off of this peace deal.

Make no mistake, with Ukraine’s dependence of USAID, it is no coincidence that Elon Musk’s DOGE has suspended all USAID humanitarian and economic aid.

Ukraine has been the largest recipient of USAID relief programs in the world. In 2023, the last year for which consolidated data is available, the figure was $17.1 billion, while the average received by states assisted by USAID is $565 million.

Whether or not the United States should have given so much aid to Ukraine is now being argued, however, it did, the reasoning behind it being, as always when the US gives masses of aid to foreign countries, to bring Ukraine to its knees, make it dependent through “kindness’ and then turn around and demand what the US wants from it as a thank you.

A few examples of programs being shut down in Ukraine:

• Veteran Hub institution, a reference in the treatment of wounded soldiers, those with psychological after-effects from battle, or those with problems reintegrating into society.

• Go Global, an NGO offering educational programs to children and teachers affected by the Russian invasion, especially those living near combat zones.

  “Just a few days ago, 150 teenagers living in areas bordering the front were supposed to attend an educational campus in Transcarpathia. Kovriga explains. “There we hoped that for the first time in three years they would be able to attend face-to-face classes [in high-risk areas, classes are only held online], interact with their peers, and relax psychologically.” The trip has now been suspended.

• USAID helped to rebuild numerous buildings in the severely damaged town of Izium, deliver food boxes, hot water tanks, repair the electricity grid. That has all been halted.

On top of that, I have no doubt that many of the people on the ground working for USAID are dedicated to their jobs, they have families to support, perhaps live in dangerous areas, and they have now been fired or suspended. By the world’s richest man who is punishing them for a policy that the United States has pursued of buying the loyalty of poorer countries ever since the Cold War.

To make people depend on you and then callously drop them as if they are the problem is business as usual, it’s just that now they are bragging about it and people think it’s great.

I will wait to see if anyone is actually prosecuted at a high level for committing any kind of fraud and I will also wait to see where the ‘savings’ go and how the money shifts to contracts that benefit those in power.

With that update:

IS TRUMP THROWING UKRAINE UNDER THE BUS OR MAKING JUST DEMANDS?

President Volodymir Zelensky stands beside a downed drone. BBC

When I think of Ukraine, I can’t help but think of Afghanistan.

“The goal is to use Afghanistan to wash money out of the tax bases of the US and Europe through Afghanistan and back into the hands of a transnational security elite. The goal is an endless war, not a successful war.” ~ Julian Assange, 2011

Why does that sound so familiar? Oh yes, it’s exactly what’s happening in Ukraine. Why would we enter into another pointless war when we’d just come out of a war that “took the USA four presidents, trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and twenty years to replace the Taliban with the Taliban”.

It seems pointless until you start asking the question, “Where did those trillions of dollars go?” Into the pockets of those who started the war, of course. Around and around the money flows and where it stops nobody knows, except the ones who are stuffing it into their pockets.

By May 2021, Afghanistan was used up and the war machine was looking elsewhere, namely, at Ukraine. Trump wasn't interested in war, much to the chagrin of Washington. But once Biden got in, it was all systems full steam ahead.

And so, the United States packed up and walked out of Afghanistan, leaving behind an estimated 15,000 Americans and 78,000 Afghans who had loyally served the United States government and applied for special visas.

What became of those who were abandoned? Poof! Gone! Old news!

New wars are started. But most wars don’t start suddenly, even if it can appear that way. Who lurks in the background, setting the stage?

A few days ago, I read two LA Times articles, The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin. and In an Age of Intercepts, the C.I.A. Makes the Case for Spies.

The Spy War put the pieces in place for the abandonment of Ukraine, but in a more philosophical manner than what happened in Afghanistan. Whether the war fizzles out or expands beyond the borders of Ukraine, it won’t be the fault of the United States, the country that wanted the war in the first place. It will be the fault of Russia, of course, but even more so, it will also be the fault of Ukraine, and Europe won't be immune either.

We were the good guys. They were the bad guys. Think James Bond. Or the classic, The Spy Who Came in from the Cold. I recently watched The Ipcress File which takes place in the 1960s. I love spy stories, and this was a good one. I hope they do a season two.

All this nostalgia reminds us that it’s okay for the United States to go into Ukraine and basically take over the country. It’s been a slow, civilized invasion and thank goodness we did it. Now, they need to show their thanks and pay up.

There’s always been something sexy and suave about spies. Nostalgic, too. Taking us back to a time when wars, cold or hot, were clearcut.

In an Age of Intercepts tells us that the C.I.A. has thrown off its cloak of secrecy in an effort to remake its image, with a podcast called “The Langley Files.” In a recent interview with the director, he revealed secrets of past operations, sharing on of the C.I.A.’s top missions: the importance of recruiting foreign spies”.

The article talks broadly about spies, explaining how “the crackdown on dissent by dictatorships has also given the agency new opportunities”.

…people who are frustrated with the direction of their country offer to provide information.

“They believe they’re doing something above and greater than themselves, and that they are willing to provide us the information that is so crucial in helping policymakers make the right decisions in the world,” Mr. Sylvester said.

We are told that citizens of foreign countries are offering themselves as spies to the United States because they believe it is for the greater good of the world.

The Spy War zooms in on Ukraine, describing a secretive intelligence partnership between the two countries and how “the details of this intelligence partnership… have been a closely guarded secret for a decade”.

Over the past 8 years, “a C.I.A.-supported network of spy bases was constructed that includes 12 secret locations along the Russian border… the C.I.A. began training an elite Ukrainian commando force” … and “helped train a new generation of Ukrainian spies who operated inside Russia, across Europe, and in Cuba and other places where the Russians have a large presence”.

According to the article:

The relationship is so ingrained that C.I.A. officers remained at a remote location in western Ukraine when the Biden administration evacuated U.S. personnel in the weeks before Russia invaded in February 2022.

Despite the revelations of this vast network of spies, the article says that “the C.I.A. didn’t push its way into Ukraine”:

Toward the end of 2021, according to a senior European official, Mr. Putin was weighing whether to launch his full-scale invasion when he met with the head of one of Russia’s main spy services, who told him that the C.I.A., together with Britain’s MI6, were controlling Ukraine and turning it into a beachhead for operations against Moscow.

But the Times investigation found that Mr. Putin and his advisers misread a critical dynamic. The C.I.A. didn’t push its way into Ukraine. U.S. officials were often reluctant to fully engage, fearing that Ukrainian officials could not be trusted, and worrying about provoking the Kremlin.

Well, of course the C.I.A. would never “push” its way in anywhere. Nor would it ever meddle in the affairs of foreign countries or seek to control them in any underhanded way. They just offer “help.”

The article unfolds an epic tale of how the C.I.A. became involved in Ukraine in the first place, thanks to courage, perseverance and ingenuity. It praises how successful this partnership has been. Even during Trump’s presidency:

But whatever Mr. Trump said and did, his administration often went in the other direction. This is because Mr. Trump had put Russia hawks in key positions, including Mike Pompeo as C.I.A. director and John Bolton as national security adviser. They visited Kyiv to underline their full support for the secret partnership, which expanded to include more specialized training programs and the building of additional secret bases.

General Budanov, whom Mr. Zelensky tapped to lead the HUR in 2020, said of the partnership: “It only strengthened. It grew systematically. The cooperation expanded to additional spheres and became more large-scale.”

The result of this cozy partnership was that “the relationship was so successful that the C.I.A. wanted to replicate it with other European intelligence services that shared a focus in countering Russia”.

The United States is using the war in Ukraine as a cover to infiltrate and build up its presence across Europe, in the nicest possible way, ensuring it is perceived as a guardian angel rather than an invading army.

While Putin was invading Ukraine, the United States was doing exactly the same thing. While the fear is that Putin will expand his reach into neighboring countries, recreating the glory days of the Soviet Union, that’s what the United States is already doing throughout Europe. The entire continent has become even more dependent on United States benevolence, while at the same time being chided for it.

As one example, leading up to the war, the United States became the largest liquified natural gas (LNG) supplier to the EU and United Kingdom in 2021, accounting for 26% of total imports. As the war commenced, in the first four months of 2022, LNG imports from the United States to the EU and the United Kingdom more than tripled, compared with 2021.

Every time the war in Ukraine threatens to wind down, the news cycle is flooded with scary stories about Putin.

Last Thursday, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin warned the House Armed Services Committee that Putin would not "stop" if Moscow wins the war in Ukraine and that NATO will be drawn into war.

I very much doubt Putin has any desire to invade Europe. Yet, somehow, Russia is supposed to turn a blind eye to the buildup of forces around its borders. Each side has its arguments as to whether or not NATO promised not to expand to the East, and each side believes they are the morally correct one.

For the perspective of the United Sates, everyone else is to blame, which is the only way to justify the billions of taxpayer dollars that continues being funneled through Ukraine.

NATO is made up of 31 countries with Sweden now joining. If money talks, and it does, we only have to look at this chart to know who owns Europe:

Trump complains about other countries not giving their fair share and that’s true. But how can any nation compete with the United States. And if anyone knows how much money talks, Trump does. It’s precisely because all of these countries have become so dependent on the United States that it can make whatever demands it wants on Europe.

NATO's 31 members have agreed on a target of spending at least 2% of gross domestic product on defense, but NATO estimates have shown that only 11 are spending that much. There’s a lot of worry that if Donald Trump becomes president again, he will attempt to upset the applecart, just like he did last time.

At a recent political rally in South Carolina Trump appeared to:

recount a meeting with NATO leaders, quoting the president of “a big country” that he did not name as asking, “Well sir, if we don't pay, and we're attacked by Russia - will you protect us?"

"I said: 'You didn't pay? You're delinquent?' He said: 'Yes, let's say that happened.' ‘No I would not protect you. In fact I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay.’"

CNN admitted that Trump’s beliefs are:

…rooted in the uncomfortable truth that European nations have underfunded their militaries for decades on the assumption that war was unlikely and that if the worst were to happen, the US would rush to their aid.

However naive that might sound, Trump trashed that assumption. And his hostility toward the Ukraine war effort has an impact even now, playing into the Republican Party’s reluctance to pass more US funding for Ukraine.

“When Trump came along it woke us up to the fact that the US might not always act in European interest, especially if it goes against American interest,” a senior EU diplomat told CNN. “It sounds naive saying it out loud, but that was the assumption a lot people made.”

All of this handwringing about Europe contributing more to its own self-defense has achieved one important goal. It has driven home the message that Europe had better do what its benefactor says. Or it will be abandoned. And we all know that isn’t an empty threat. Just look at Afghanistan.

The war in Ukraine has been used for many purposes. For money-laundering and to enrich the coffers of the rich and powerful. To test abilities for intelligence gathering. To test new weaponry. To further trap all of Europe under the umbrella of the United States.

Ukraine has been thrown under the bus. It will forever be beholden to its benefactor, the United States. As for Europe? It had better shape up or else.

It’s difficult for Americans to reconcile the price we must pay for being the most prosperous nation on earth with what we are taught growing up: that we are not only the wealthiest and most powerful nation on earth, but that we are also the most moral.

As John le Carré wrote in The Spy Who Came in from the Cold:

How far can we go in the rightful defense of our Western values without abandoning them along the way? My fictional chief of the British Service—I called him Control—had no doubt of the answer: “I mean, you can’t be less ruthless than the opposition simply because your government’s policy is benevolent, can you now?”

Today, the same man, with better teeth and hair and a much smarter suit, can be heard explaining away the catastrophic illegal war in Iraq, or justifying medieval torture techniques as the preferred means of interrogation in the twenty-first century, or defending the inalienable right of closet psychopaths to bear semi-automatic weapons, and the use of unmanned drones as a risk-free method of assassinating one’s perceived enemies and anybody who has the bad luck to be standing near them. Just that the morals of the secret world are very like our own.”