Former US Army Colonel makes harsh criticism of the Ukraine War

February 24 marks three years since the beginning of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which has generated intense discussions about its causes, evolution and possible outcomes.

The date leads to questions about the reason for the durability of the conflict and the negotiations that recently gained a new momentum with conversations between the United States and Russia.

Following are expert insights, including former US Army Colonel Earl Rasmussen, about current prospects for the future of war.

The dialogue between USA and Russia: a necessary advance

Last week, representatives from the United States and Russia met in Saudi Arabia, where they discussed possibilities for a solution to the conflict.

Although the differences between the two powers remain significant, Rasmussen believes that the mere resumption of dialogue is a positive step.

In an interview with Global Timesthe expert stressed the importance of restoring formal diplomatic channels, considering that the confidence between the West and Russia has been deeply affected in recent years.

Rasmussen, which for a while has been skeptical about the possibility of rapid resolution, now sees a “light at the end of the tunnel”, although it has emphasized that a continuous effort of the parts involved to achieve an agreement that is beneficial to everyone will be needed.

“We will see where this goes in the next two weeks,” he said, maintaining a tone of caution, but also of hope.

Impact of conflict in Europe and Ukraine

The war, which has been going on for more than three years, has caused severe economic impacts, especially in Europe.

Rasmussen points out that many European countries are facing recession, and points out that Ukraine, in turn, is dealing with a serious shortage of labor, which limits its resistance, even with the Western military support.

For him, the inability of the Ukrainian forces to match Russia’s logistics capabilities, added to the sending of young people without proper training for the front lines, represents a “waste.”

Rasmussen also notes that, while Ukraine faces extreme difficulties, the Russian economy, on the other hand, continues to thrive, contrary to some of the initial expectations on the impact of sanctions.

The war, according to the expert, is a tragedy that should never have occurred, and it reinforces the need to avoid conflict, suggesting that international cooperation could have avoided this tragedy.

Possibilities of a lasting ceasefire

When asked when the war could come to an end, Rasmussen stated that the conflict will only cease if the parties involved, especially Ukraine and Europe, accept the conditions established by US and Russia.

He stressed that the continuity of the war depends largely on the willingness of Kiev and his European allies to join a ceasefire agreement. If this does not happen, he believes that the conflict will persist, resulting in more deaths and destruction.

The perspective of a lasting ceasefire, according to Rasmussen, is complex. For him, the Cold War mindset still prevails among Western leaders, which prevents a deeper understanding of the real situation.

“We need a complete peace agreement,” he said, suggesting that the war will not end significantly as long as Western powers remain rigid in their positions.

The US perspective and the media

Rasmussen also addressed the unilateral perception that many Americans have of the conflict. He argues that the predominant narrative in the United States, often driven by government -controlled media, distorts reality, ignoring the complexity of the situation.

According to him, the actions of the West, especially the US, were fundamental to the escalation of the conflict, and the media played an important role in manipulating public opinion, silenced dissident voices.

“It was the West that provoked the situation. Russia did not want the war to last so much, ”he said, criticizing western intervention shortly after the first signs of possible diplomatic resolution. For Rasmussen, the lack of a balanced debate in the United States is one of the reasons why many Americans only hear a version of history, which, in their view, contributes to the continuity of the conflict.

The geopolitical strategy of the West

Regarding US foreign policy, there is speculation that the West is trying to sow discord between Russia and China. Rasmussen opposes this rhetoric, advocating a more cooperative and multipolar approach to international relations.

He emphasizes that the world is becoming increasingly multipolar and that the United States should accept and work with other powers, such as Russia and China, rather than trying to weaken them.

The expert also questions the plans of some Western Think Tanks that suggest ways to weaken these two powers. “If the West follows this way, it will fail,” he warned.

Rasmussen believes that the only way to promote global economic growth lies in an approach that favors cooperation and mutual benefits instead of division and conflict.

Conclusion

While the conflict between Russia and Ukraine turns three years, the situation remains uncertain and volatile. Recent negotiations between the US and Russia offer cautious hope of resolution, but the future of the conflict depends on the willingness of the parties to accept a more diplomatic and less belligerent approach.

The war, which has already caused immense destruction and suffering, remains a tragedy that could have been avoided, and the international community will be tested in its ability to promote peace and cooperation in the global geopolitical scenario.