Foreign policy “experts” vocally in favor of Ukraine called on Wednesday for bringing the embattled nation into NATO, which many say would risk a direct NATO-Russia war.
Alexander Vindman, who was at the center of former President Donald Trump’s first impeachment, former Russia ambassador Michael McFaul, former Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-NJ), and other foreign policy “experts” released an op-ed on Politico Magazine ahead of the NATO summit:
In Vilnius, the alliance should launch a roadmap that will lead clearly to Ukraine’s membership in NATO at the earliest achievable date. As with Finland and Sweden, the process can bypass the Membership Action Plan in light of the close and ongoing interactions between NATO and Ukraine. NATO heads of state and government should task the Council in permanent session to develop recommendations on the timing and modalities of an accession process for Ukraine for decision at the next NATO summit in Washington in 2024.
Then-National Security Council Director for European Affairs Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman reads an opening statement before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump, November 19, 2019, in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Stephen Wertheim, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment, said that bringing Ukraine into NATO would risk a wider European conflict.
“A number of signatories also signed an open letter last year calling for a no-fly zone over Ukraine. This is no coincidence: admitting Ukraine into NATO, like imposing a no-fly zone, would run a significant risk of bringing about a direct NATO-Russia war,” Wertheim wrote.
A number of signatories also signed an open letter last year calling for a no-fly zone over Ukraine. This is no coincidence: admitting Ukraine into NATO, like imposing a no-fly zone, would run a significant risk of bringing about a direct NATO-Russia war. https://t.co/IcSfKdIYtt
— Stephen Wertheim (@stephenwertheim) July 5, 2023
Dan Caldwell, a vice president at the Center for Renewing America, contended that at least 12 of those who signed onto the letter have received money from Ukrainian oligarchs.
He explained, “At least 12 of the signatories to this letter work at institutions that have received or are currently receiving money from Ukrainian oligarchs, Ukrainian companies like Burisma, or directly from the Ukrainian gov. For example, here is John Herbst and Evelyn Farkas in 2018.”
At least 12 of the signatories to this letter work at institutions that have received or are currently receiving money from Ukrainian oligarchs, Ukrainian companies like Burisma, or directly from the Ukrainian gov. For example, here is John Herbst and Evelyn Farkas in 2018: https://t.co/MDKbISxAoM pic.twitter.com/ueouf5aHAB
— Dan Caldwell 🇺🇸 (@dandcaldwell) July 5, 2023
Foreign policy advocacy often involves questions of conflict of interest. Ben Freeman, a research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, noted that of the 27 pro-Ukraine think tanks whose donors could be identified, 21, or 77 percent, received funding from the military-industrial complex.
The top ten institutes include:
- Brookings Institution
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
- Wilson Center
- RAND Corporation
- Atlantic Council
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Center for American Progress
- Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
- Hudson Institute
Freeman wrote, “While think tank experts might have myriad reasons for supporting increased U.S. military spending, some have an additional incentive: their employer is funded by military contractors profiting from the war.”
While Ukraine’s protracted conflict continues, Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenksy met with environmental activist Greta Thunberg to discuss Russia’s alleged environmental crimes:
President of Ukraine via Storyful
Sean Moran is a policy reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @SeanMoran3.
Comments are closed.