Wars in Iran and Ukraine: Timothy Snyder's Comments
American historian Timothy Snyder discussed the wars in Iran and Ukraine in an interview with former U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice, noting that the war in Ukraine can be won. Snyder emphasized that if the Trump administration had aimed for victory, it could have chosen Ukraine as a priority, but instead preferred wars like the one in Iran, which seem easier and promise personal gain.
According to reports, U.S. spending on the war against Iran exceeded $65 billion. Despite this, Iran managed to withstand months of attacks and raise the stakes. Snyder pointed out that the U.S. invested significant resources but did not achieve substantial results. Susan Rice added that this war only strengthened Iran and gave it control over the Strait of Hormuz. During military operations, Patriot and THAAD missiles were used, which are critically lacking for supporting Ukraine.
Pressure on the President of Ukraine
Moreover, Washington is pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to reach an agreement with Moscow on terms of concessions. Snyder also noted that the U.S. administration fears bravery, democracy, and people who truly know how to fight.
“Ukraine is the war that can be won. If Trump's people needed a victory, they could have chosen this one,” – Timothy Snyder.
These comments underscore the importance of supporting Ukraine in its efforts against aggression, as well as questioning U.S. strategies in international conflicts. Snyder emphasizes the need for a more active approach to supporting Ukraine, which could influence future Washington decisions regarding military and political assistance to this country. At the same time, the expressed views could spark new discussions about U.S. foreign policy and its interests on the world stage.
As the debate around U.S. military support for Ukraine intensifies, it's crucial to examine the implications of previous administrations' decisions. For instance, Trump's refusal to provide advanced missile technologies has raised questions about the effectiveness of American support in conflicts where strategic victories are still attainable. Understanding these dynamics can shed light on the current situation and the potential paths forward for U.S. foreign policy.