A Reflection of a Narrative, Nothing More: President Biden's First State of the Union
After a lousy first year-plus and nothing to show for it, Biden hid behind what's going on in Ukraine during his State of the Union address, showing support can be forged through conflict.
After the withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was felt here and in countless other spaces that the Military Industrial Complex—one of the heaviest fists of the corporatist establishment—would find other ways to turn blood into money. It seems that is coming to fruition, accompanied no less by the use of conflict—even if it's going on in Europe and was pushed to this point on account of American imperialism—as a form of cover, a distraction.
President Biden, in his State of the Union address, led with his partisan, pro-imperial shtick about Russia before laying out all the things he wants to accomplish as president, as if he hadn't spent the last year-plus cutting out of legislation and stalling the progress of those very things.
On the president went—Medicare expansion, lower prescription drug costs, extending the child tax credit, a $15 minimum wage, free community college, supporting workers, making the tax system fair, among others—listing one by one things that were strangled out of failed legislation, denied by a parliamentarian, or ignored by the executive pen while he was overseeing it all from the bully pulpit. It was like he was intentionally trying to aggravate anyone who's paid any remote attention to his administration.
The sad fact—the one nobody could reasonably expect a president to admit—is that the state of the union is not strong right now, it hasn't been strong for a while, precipitously declining as more and more people continue to struggle. And the biggest, most obvious piece of evidence that this is the case is that Biden spent the first ten minutes or so—the most important and widely seen segment before minds predictably lose interest—berating Russian autocracy and aggression.
As was said in this space, military action is unjustifiable, but the reality is if the United States wanted to support Ukrainian people—inhabitants of a country now inflicted with war— and support peace, they would have done everything possible to avoid brewing a conflict there to begin with.
But they didn't.
And now the Biden administration is utilizing this crisis as a unifier because the things that would have gained popularity with ordinary people—the things the administration has failed to fight for—were cast aside, forcing the need for some good-versus-evil oversimplification to portray a different reality, one contrived and meant to obfuscate. Biden quoted President (and former comedic actor) Volodymyr Zelensky, saying: "Light will win over darkness."
On the world stage, with various ultra-capitalist powers, there's no good and evil, just one side's interests and the other's, one side's narrative and the other's.
In the era of multi-polarity, where other powers are countering U.S. global power, keeping up the illusion that this nation is the moral superior is vital— if you convince people that you're the moral superior, you have their implicit consent to both write and enforce the law.
When it comes down to it, it has nothing to do with morality, just power. Same is the case for Biden's address last night, it had nothing to do with reflecting the current state of this country, just preserving power.
And out of consideration for that power, he painted an inaccurate portrait of the present situation, a reflection of a mere narrative.
Throughout our history we’ve learned this lesson: when dictators do not pay a price for their aggression they cause more chaos.
They keep moving.
And the costs and the threats to the America [sic] and the world keep rising.
That’s why the NATO alliance was created: to secure peace and stability in Europe after World War II.
The United States is a member along with 29 other nations.
It matters. American diplomacy matters. American resolve matters.
Right off the bat he was calling NATO an organization that wants peace and stability, referring to it as the objective arbiters of what is right and wrong when in reality it is nothing more than an offensive organization that exists well beyond the expiration of its purpose and seeks to "subjugate" Europe, as anti-war organizer Brian Becker put it in a great conversation with Abby Martin.
NATO was formed in 1949 and consisted of the U.S., Canada, and Western European nations as a post-World War II military alliance intent on "securing peace" on the continent as animosity for the Soviet Union was growing hot within the American government. West Germany joined in 1959, and less than a week later the Warsaw Pact was founded, which was a defense treaty comprised of the USSR and other soviet states serving as a counter to both NATO and to the concern of a rearmed Germany at the time.
When the Soviet Union dissolved and the Warsaw Pact did so with it, and when the Western concept of peace was thus secured, NATO did not go anywhere. As Becker noted, they shifted their role. And what has that gotten us? The scorching of Yugoslavia in the 1990's, an invasion of Afghanistan, and the bombing of Libya.
That's not diplomacy.
But tell us your thoughts on diplomacy, Joe.
Putin’s latest attack on Ukraine was premeditated and unprovoked.
He rejected repeated efforts at diplomacy.
Well actually, it was the other way around. As noted before here, it was the U.S. and NATO that avoided diplomacy and deescalation.
It was the U.S. who backed the coup in 2014 that installed a government dripping in nationalist neo-nazi elements. Worse, as Becker noted, when there was an opportunity for a mediated solution, it was Russia who was given the cold shoulder.
The Minsk Accords were a series of diplomatic agreements that never came to fruition. They would have kept the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics part of Ukraine while granting them autonomy— it would have been the definition of diplomacy if all sides had followed through.
But the far-right element of the Ukrainian government who rose to power on the back of the U.S.-backed coup thrived on conflict with Russia. Why? Because flaring tensions with Russia raises nationalist sentiments and support for their neo-fascism.
Even as the administration of drone strikes and kill lists, the Obama administration recognized the importance of restraint and chose not to send arms to Ukraine. But as soon as Trump came right in—you know, the guy who's totally a Russian asset—selling weapons to Ukraine, getting impeached even when he threatened to withhold arms from them. And Biden continued the effort when he came into office.
So the portrayal of each side's diplomatic integrity was totally askew.
Same is the case in the current conflict, where just a couple of days ago the U.S. State Department was discouraging ceasefire talks between Ukraine and Russia because, as they characterized it, it was diplomacy taking place "at the barrel of a gun."
The two delegations eventually met this past weekend with not much progress, but they're supposed to meet for another round today. Given the U.S.'s reckless behavior, though, who knows if they won't meddle with the development of any productive discussions.
But of course, Biden wasn't about to let on about America's reckless information behavior as he continued in his address.
He thought the West and NATO wouldn’t respond. And he thought he could divide us at home. Putin was wrong. We were ready. Here is what we did.
We prepared extensively and carefully.
We spent months building a coalition of other freedom-loving nations from Europe and the Americas to Asia and Africa to confront Putin.
I spent countless hours unifying our European allies. We shared with the world in advance what we knew Putin was planning and precisely how he would try to falsely justify his aggression.
We countered Russia’s lies with truth.
As previously said, the U.S. countered Russia's openness to dialogue with constant exacerbation of the tensions they created. Say what you will about him—and you can say a whole hell of a lot—Putin made his side's red lines clear, always leaving the door open for diplomacy. It was the U.S. that constantly egged on the conflict. Russia's military build up on the border was in part due to military drills, but it was also without a doubt a statement. As Brian Becker suspects, the troop build up was a clear indication of what plan B is if diplomacy is refused.
It was clear as day, and the U.S. pushed for the worst outcome. And now they intend to step on the gas.
Along with twenty-seven members of the European Union including France, Germany, Italy, as well as countries like the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and many others, even Switzerland.
We are inflicting pain on Russia and supporting the people of Ukraine. Putin is now isolated from the world more than ever. [Standing Ovation.]
Together with our allies, we are right now enforcing powerful economic sanctions.
We're cutting off Russia’s largest banks from the international financial system.
Preventing Russia’s central bank from defending the Russian Ruble making Putin’s $630 Billion “war fund” worthless.
We're choking off Russia’s access to technology that will sap its economic strength and weaken its military for years to come.
Sanctions: that favored method of the U.S. establishment. The form of heavy handed justice that punishes ordinary people. Right in line with the theme of the term’s first year.
Here, stepping out even further towards the edge of the abyss, the U.S. power establishment is evidently all in for economic war being inflicted on Russia. It's almost like the west, on its pedestal of moral superiority, gets giddy at the mere thought of ratcheting up the heat. They could care less about the implications of removing Russian banks from SWIFT, they support “freedom.”
And Biden kept going, turning to "the oligarchs."
Tonight I say to the Russian oligarchs and the corrupt leaders who have built billions of dollars off this violent regime: no more. [Applause.]
The United States — I mean it — The United States Department of Justice is assembling a dedicated task force to go after the crimes of Russian oligarchs.
We are joining with our European allies to find and seize their yachts, their luxury apartments, their private jets. We are coming for your ill-begotten gains.
This obsession with using one set of words for one side and another set for the other side is ridiculous because it gets old fast.
Don't people know that the United States also has plenty of oligarchs? Power in the hands of the few, and those few just get hot and bothered when people direct the word oligarch at the Russians.
Clint Ehrlich noted that this focus of targeting oligarchs may actually be of help to Putin.
Whatever the feelings are in Russia, it's a cause for elation in Washington. As is the case, of course, for the economic war and the continued alienation of a country already dangerously pushed into a corner:
And tonight I am announcing that we will join our allies in closing off American air space to all Russian flights, further isolating Russia and adding an additional squeeze on their economy. [Standing ovation.]
The Ruble has lost 30% of its value.
The Russian stock market has lost 40% of its value and trading remains suspended. Russia’s economy is reeling and Putin alone is to blame.
Together with our allies we are providing support to the Ukrainians in their fight for freedom. Military assistance. Economic assistance. Humanitarian assistance.
We are giving more than $1 Billion in direct assistance to Ukraine.
And we will continue to aid the Ukrainian people as they defend their country and to help ease their suffering.
And the U.S. continues toeing the line of what could be widespread devastation. . .
But let me be clear, our forces are not engaged and will not engage in the conflict with Russian forces in Ukraine.
Our forces are not going to Europe to fight Ukraine [sic], but to defend our NATO Allies in the event that Putin decides to keep moving west.
For that purpose we’ve mobilized American ground forces, air squadrons, and ship deployments to protect NATO countries including Poland, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia.
And as I’ve made crystal clear, the United States and our Allies will defend every inch of territory of NATO countries with the full force of our collective power.
Considering everything being neglected, this sort of rationalization and position on the matter is as delusional as it is frightening. But at the same time, from this perspective—as frustrating as it is—it's clear how well narrative wars and propaganda can warp minds.
Tip-toeing along the edge of all out global destruction seems half-way necessary to too many, particularly the powerful. To them, they're in control, but it seems clear that it is beyond their comprehension how just one minor mix-up can result in catastrophe.
As mobilization continues, potential signs of potentially devastating escalation have been raised, and while not exactly confirmed, they were not denied.
Michael Tracey wrote a good piece on it, and Ehrlich called attention to it initially, but the Ukrainian Air Force posted a social media post about receiving jets from the EU and reports noted Ukrainian pilots were in Poland to pick up the planes, but such jets would require new training for those pilots so the belief became that they were EU pilots, a grave violation that would lead to massive escalation. Or at the very least, they are Ukrainian pilots, but they're launching from Polish bases since air fields in Ukraine have mostly been neutralized, another instant escalation were it to be the case.
There is room to believe the west wouldn't be so foolish as to teeter on this edge so wildly, but when Tracey asked the EU Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Division, they did not come out and deny anything, just affirming support for Ukraine. Then Tracey asked Poland's Ministry of Defense, which referred him to a verbal statement by Poland's president.
Here was the English translation of that statement:
"We are not sending any jets to Ukraine, that would open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict. We are not joining that conflict. NATO is not a party to that conflict… we are not going to send any jets to the Ukrainian airspace."
Again, not entirely clear. Answers from two other nations Tracey posed the question to offered similarly vague responses.
As Tracey figures it, either these fighter jet operations are another fake element in the competing waves of war propaganda or legitimate obfuscation is happening.
Time will tell. Hope that's reassuring.
Want reassurance? Let's see what else the president had to say. . .
To all Americans, I will be honest with you, as I’ve always promised. A Russian dictator, invading a foreign country, has costs around the world.
And I’m taking robust action to make sure the pain of our sanctions is targeted at Russia’s economy. And I will use every tool at our disposal to protect American businesses and consumers.
Tonight, I can announce that the United States has worked with 30 other countries to release 60 Million barrels of oil from reserves around the world.
America will lead that effort, releasing 30 Million barrels from our own Strategic Petroleum Reserve. And we stand ready to do more if necessary, unified with our allies.
These steps will help blunt gas prices here at home. And I know the news about what’s happening can seem alarming.
But I want you to know that we are going to be okay.
Oh yes, we cannot forget the oil element to this whole Russia-Ukraine issue. It's another reason NATO continues to do what it does in Europe, as Becker noted: it forces Europe to trade with the U.S. rather than with their natural trading partner Russia, particularly in terms of energy.
Nord Stream 2 was a huge source of contention in the build up of this tension, and had it gone through, it would have surrendered too many wins to Russia as far as the U.S. corporatist establishment is concerned.
But if the U.S. comes out on the right side of this, history will omit that fluff.
Right, Joe?
When the history of this era is written Putin’s war on Ukraine will have left Russia weaker and the rest of the world stronger.
Translation: If America does come out on the right side of this—which in their mind is unipolarity again—then history can mock the Russians for ever thinking of challenging the U.S.-imposed world order.
In the battle between democracy and autocracy, democracies are rising to the moment, and the world is clearly choosing the side of peace and security.
This is a real test. It’s going to take time. So let us continue to draw inspiration from the iron will of the Ukrainian people.
To our fellow Ukrainian Americans who forge a deep bond that connects our two nations we stand with you.
Putin may circle Kyiv with tanks, but he will never gain the hearts and souls of the Iranian [sic] people.
He will never extinguish their love of freedom. He will never weaken the resolve of the free world.
And Biden could have walked out of that House chamber right then and been the hottest commodity in town.
There's no reason to go on and on any further about a speech that will be forgotten in mere days, but it is worthy to take note of the fact that a presidential administration will cling to conflict if it means better support. And as the guy who said "nothing will fundamentally change," if he can generate support without fundamentally changing anything, then he's all in.
That was the biggest pity of the night: to see Biden successfully take cover behind what's going on in Ukraine after putting together an awful first year-plus.
One can only hope further escalation does not occur as a result of trying to generate support via foreign conflict.
A wounded animal is capable of doing crazy things.
While The Huxleyan intends to remain free to the public, there are paid subscription offers (which would be more of a donation than receiving access to anything in particular) at $5/month, or $45/year. As always, donations are welcome and appreciated via Venmo (@john-pongratz). Again, as those are just options, everything remains free. Thank you for reading and be sure to subscribe, comment, and share!