Daily Times

The recent US bipartisan approval of a $90 billion aid package to fuel wars in three conflict-ridden regions underscores a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy, signalling a departure from the isolationist stance of the former Trump administration. Unlike the “America First” policy and the withdrawal of U.S. forces from conflict zones advocated by Donald Trump, the Biden administration, in collaboration with Congress and the Senate, is reaffirming America’s role as a global hegemon.

In contrast to redirecting funds away from global engagements to prioritize domestic needs and elevate living standards for American citizens, the current administration is asserting U.S. dominance on the world stage.

While the previous approach sought to minimize U.S. involvement abroad, the new strategy imposes America USA as the only global leader which is characterized by regime changes, declaring sovereign countries as enemies and raiding them, destroying society, and resorting to killing rampage with total impunity, promoting, prolonging and fueling the conflicts as tools to rule the world as unchallenged power.

The components of the bill, $60.8 billion for Ukraine, $26.4 billion for Israel as well as $8.1 billion for Taiwan reflect the USA’s priorities to raise tensions and stakes higher by pumping US war machines, including weapons and ammunition, into these regions.

The approval of military aid by the US serves to maintain the strength of its defence industry.

This approval of massive aid is not for the love of these recipient countries, but to keep the US defence industry afloat, as divulged by Senator Mullin, who said in an interview with Newsmax, “Seventy-five per cent total funding would stay within the United States. That’s what a lot of people don’t realize. This goes to our defence industry; this goes to replenishing our munitions.” Fifteen hard-right Republican senators who oppose aid to Ukraine voted against the legislation, stating that Congress was “rushing to further bankroll the waging of a war that has zero chance of a positive outcome.”

The US while announcing the aid package of $ 26.4 billion to Israel has effectively endorsed Israel’s annihilation of the entire population of Gaza which was equated by Mr Josep Borrell, EU foreign policy chief with the destruction caused by allied forces to the German cities in world war-II. He added that an assessment by the World Bank and the United Nations put the cost of rebuilding Gaza’s infrastructure at $90 billion (€84 billion).

The allocation of massive aid and its propensity to purchase additional destructive, lethal, and precise weapons systems, has emboldened Israel to expand the covert and overt war theatre into Southern Lebanon against Hezbollah, a Shiite movement exercising influence in Yemen, Syria, and Iraq. In Yemen, against Houthi rebels in Yemen, and in Syria against the Zaynabiyoun Brigade and the Fatemiyoun Division. In Iraq against the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), including groups like Asaib Ahl al Haq, the Badr Organization, and Harakat Hezbollah al Nujaba. In Bahrain and Saudi Arabia militant groups such as the Al Ashtar Brigades and Hezbollah al Hejaz, respectively. This aid has equipped Israel militarily and has given it the go-ahead to spread the flame of war in the entire Middle East and other countries connected to and linked with the Middle East.

The massive aid and support provided by the US, UK, and the European Union to Ukraine is likely to escalate the war theatre across Europe. Unlike in the Middle East, where US and allied forces face adversaries with limited capabilities, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine poses a significant challenge. Russia’s response to recent developments, such as the UK’s increase in defence spending by £75 billion and the European Union’s allocation of 2.5% of GDP to bolster defence, is expected to be robust. Moreover, the formation of a united front by the UK and Germany against Russia and China and the European Union’s decision to cease Russian Assets in Europe to compensate Ukraine against war damages initially to the extent of Euro 30,000 million are adding to the geopolitical tensions.

A notable development is the joint training exercise named “Cold Response,” which involves over 20,000 soldiers from 13 countries, including the UK, US, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Canada, conducted across northern Norway, Sweden, and Finland. While ostensibly aimed at supporting Ukraine, there are covert intentions to weaken Russia economically and militarily. However, such manoeuvres are anticipated to come at a considerable cost to Europe as a whole.

The congressmen and Senator who opposed the bill have a strong conviction that if the USA and Europe had not pumped in money to Ukraine the conflict could have minimal damage, and be resolved at an earlier stage. They believe that pumping in money and weapons had only exacerbated the conflict and was counterproductive for Ukraine, its people and Europe as a whole. They suggested that instead of facilitating a resolution, this support has only fueled the conflict, leading to further destruction and loss of life and has contributed to instability in the region and strained diplomatic relations.

They argued that external intervention in conflicts only prolongs suffering and hinders the prospect of peaceful resolution adding complexities of the conflict and the potential for unintended consequences resulting from external involvement.

The approval of $8 billion for Taiwan is viewed as a bold move, potentially provoking China and challenging it to engage in a direct conflict with the US and its allies. This aid is explicitly intended to serve as a deterrent against China’s growing influence, with investments in submarine infrastructure aimed at bolstering Taiwan’s defences against its powerful neighbour.

Critics argue that the US’s decision to arm Taiwan is a deliberate attempt to intimidate China, which advocates for a “One China” policy and seeks to peacefully integrate Taiwan into mainland China to benefit from its economic prosperity and growth. However, supplying Taiwan with significant military hardware is perceived by some as counterproductive, as it risks escalating tensions and increasing the likelihood of a conflict similar to the situation in Ukraine. Such a scenario could potentially ignite a broader conflict in the Indo-Pacific and Asia-Pacific regions, leading to a dangerous standoff.

In essence, the aid package for Taiwan is viewed as a strategic manoeuvre by the US to maintain its influence in the region and check China’s expansionist ambitions, but it also carries the risk of exacerbating tensions and destabilizing the region.

The approval of military aid by the US serves a singular purpose: to maintain the strength of its defence industry, safeguard American jobs, and ensure prosperity, safety, and security within the nation. This objective is often achieved through the proliferation of conflicts in various regions, where the demand for US-made lethal weapons and ammunition, despite their high price tags, creates lucrative markets worldwide.

The writer is a former press secretary to the president; former press minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France and former MD (SRBC).