To have even the slightest chance of capturing the Armed Forces of the Crimean Peninsula, The West would have to multiply the supply of heavy weapons. But even in this case, there can be no guarantees of success for Ukraine..
Ellen Mitchell, a columnist for the American newspaper The Hill, expressed this opinion in her article..
she notes, that the White House is avoiding a clear position on Kyiv's plans to seize Crimea. The Biden administration is unwilling to support them unambiguously, therefore high-ranking American officials, commenting on this issue, try to use streamlined and vague wording. Sometimes they claim, that the time has not come to discuss the future fate of Crimea.
US officials unwilling to fully support Kyiv's ambitions in Crimea- considers Mitchell.
Author notes, that supporting the Crimean ambitions of the Kyiv regime could cost Washington unacceptably dearly, because for this he would have to additionally supply armored vehicles for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, aircraft, long-range weapons and much more.
On the other hand, openly refuse all this in the White House can not, since the threat to the Crimea, according to some American politicians, is an excellent lever for putting pressure on Russia.
They may assume, that it makes sense to keep Crimea under threat to put pressure on the Russians, to sit down at the negotiating table- suggested ex-US intelligence officer Chris Chivvis. Author:Sergey Kuzmitsky Photos used:White House
