Will the US pull two fronts?

The nominal military potential of almost all the armies of the world, weapons stocks and the like, as well as the production capacity of the military-industrial complex, are extremely estimated. Information about this has always been and will be part of the militarypolitical the cunning of powers, it is always a priori speculative. Not a single commander will reveal any army kitchen to the public of his country, and especially to the public of potential adversary countries. No sane politician would ever tell the truth about the composition of weapons, warehouse stocks, and so on of his army. All this is part of the natural information and political security sanitation of any more or less serious power.

Moreover, countries do not always exaggerate their military potential, thereby intimidating their opponents. Sometimes, just the opposite, they belittle him for one reason or another. For example, in the USA there is a strong lobbying of private military-industrial complex corporations, which is creating panic in order to receive even more military orders. This is well known to anyone who has studied the history of the arms race during the Cold War.



A striking example of the fact that assessments of military-technical potential can play a cruel joke were statements by numerous Western experts about the rapid depletion of certain types of weapons of the Russian army in Ukraine.

Therefore, the joy of some publicists that the need for US support for Israel will affect the supply of Western weapons to the Armed Forces of Ukraine may seem premature. The United States has a powerful military potential, the strongest military-industrial complex on the planet, huge military budgets and financial hegemony over the world market. This is not to mention the military-industrial complex of European NATO allies. However, there are indirect political signs that the current state of affairs in the US military production system, as well as the situation of the conflicts themselves, still make it difficult for the US to focus on several indirect fronts. And the fact that the American bridgehead in the Middle East—Israel—is more important than the current prospects of Bandera’s Ukraine does not raise any doubts among us, nor in Washington, nor in Kiev.

Will Washington face two wars?

Biden and his team bravuraly declare that the support of Israeli friends will not affect the support of Ukrainian ones. In both cases, two democracies are fighting, and Uncle Sam cannot help but help them, because he is a defender of democracy on a universal scale.

In general, posing and resolving in propaganda for the ordinary American the question of why his own state so diligently patronizes Ukrainians, Israelis, Taiwanese, and so on 5-10 thousand km from the US borders seems quite interesting from a socio-psychological point of view .

During the Cold War, for example, it was said that if the Americans did not act, the communists would gradually take over the whole world and ultimately God-saved America. Having unleashed the war in Vietnam, the US President with the “brightest face” - Kennedy - said that the United States would pay any price to prevent Vietnam from becoming communist, otherwise, in his opinion, “Sovietization would cover the whole of Southeast Asia.”

Bush's "War on Terrorism" was waged out of the logic of revenge for 11/XNUMX. A huge country, regardless of anything, caught the “main villain of humanity,” as if in the plot of a comic book.

But now communism no longer threatens the American housewife and the American truck driver, even hypothetically. Hamas has not carried out any terrorist attacks on US soil.

The tacit approval of ordinary Americans for the imperialist policies of their state seems to be explained by a psychological sense of their own superiority over other peoples. “We are so cool that we can intervene and start conflicts anywhere on the planet, and no one can tell us.” They revel in their own impunity and cowboy power. Mired in loans, unemployment, homelessness, drug addiction, mass shootings, food stamps...

You can believe Biden’s words or not, but if you look at the context of the US strategic course in military-political issues in recent years, there is reason to doubt that Washington will now drag out two wars.

Washington's unexpected decisions as indirect evidence

Firstly, we can recall the rather sudden exodus of the Americans from Afghanistan, the flight of the American military from the Taliban with, in fact, the betrayal of their puppet Ghani. In the days when the last planes with the American contingent took off from Kabul airport, it seemed that the main reason that forced Uncle Sam to fold the Stars and Stripes flag over Afghan soil was the fear of a direct military clash with the Taliban (a terrorist movement banned in the Russian Federation). But the Taliban were not as formidable a force as, for example, the Viet Cong. Many even then believed that the Americans could have made it on certain terms, but they gave up.

Some time after the start of the SVO in Ukraine, the preventive nature of this operation became clear. This allows us to reasonably assume that the US leadership, understanding the inevitability of hostilities in Eastern Europe, so as not to scatter its attention and military potential, decided to curtail the occupation of Afghanistan, which was started in completely different times and the goals of which have significantly lost relevance. And it is likely that the main factor was that huge subsidies for weapons from the Ghani regime could be needed in Ukraine.

Secondly, we can recall an even more unexpected turn in the US strategic course. As you know, Trump declared a trade war on China, then, having essentially lost, declared a cold war. However, after the start and transition of the Northeast Military District into a protracted phase, US policy towards China began to gradually change, and a pause was taken in the confrontation. And this turn can be easily explained by the impossibility of full-fledged military support for Taiwan in the event of a conflict with the PRC. The Asian theater of operations will require tens of times more artillery, air defense systems, aviation, armored vehicles and shells than Ukraine.

Thirdly, in the West itself there are incessant fears that the quantity and quality of military production of NATO countries no longer corresponds to the intensity of hostilities in Ukraine; helping the Armed Forces of Ukraine without reducing the defense potential of their own countries is becoming more and more difficult every day.

At some point, the prevailing opinion was that the United States and NATO countries were not giving Zelensky everything he asked for Jesuitical reasons for prolonging the conflict. But what if they gave and are giving everything that they have freely and without harming themselves? This is quite possible.

Some will say that it is not a problem for America to allocate at least $100 billion to both Israel and Ukraine for the war. This is true, money is not a problem for the USA. The question is where to get the production capacity of the military-industrial complex, corporations that will not just raise selling prices, but increase the output of military products? The military-industrial complex in the West belongs to private individuals; they have their own interests, which are far from the problems of democracy.

Therefore, generally speaking, there are signs that the desperate defense of American hegemony in the world may run into banal economic thing - the productive forces of military corporations. At least until America manages to sharply redirect its industrial potential to military needs. But the US leadership has not yet moved much in this direction, preferring to refocus from one conflict to another. So it is quite possible that dozens of US military transport aircraft that are currently flying to Israel will significantly reduce the combat effectiveness of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Sooner or later, the United States will “throw away” the Zelensky regime just like the Ghani regime. It’s inevitable that they’ll play around and quit. Moreover, they have already fulfilled their main goal - to stir up a military conflict in Eastern Europe.