Queen of Chicken Hawks Unchecked Aggression Destablises World

Characterising Victoria Nuland as a war mongering psychopath is not an unreasonable description.

Traits exhibited over 30 years in government where her lust has been for power and war, Nuland has been instrumental in every foreign policy disaster undertaken by the US.

Until several days ago, Nuland was central to America’s proxy war against Russia, with Ukraine the battering ram to fulfill her and the neocons overzealous hunger to depose President Vladimir Putin.

Toria, as Anthony Blinken, US Secretary of State, affectionately refers to her as, announced Nuland’s resignation, on Tuesday March 7, as Under Secretary for Political Affairs for the State Department.

Blinken’s announcement came as a surprise, but the US could be signalling it may be rethinking its foreign policy stance toward Russia - acknowledging a new approach might be necessary.

A veteran of US foreign policy, Nuland is the Queen of Chicken Hawks.

Her lust for war has steered the world on a course to potential nuclear Armageddon – so much is her Russophobia and hatred for Putin.

When US President Joe Biden nominated Nuland for Under Secretary for Political Affairs, in the State Department, Nuland became the Department’s third-highest ranking official.

Her nomination gave Nuland greater power and the opportunity to sew global conflict and shape the geopolitical landscape for neoconservatives who’ve led US foreign policy from one disaster to another, without accountability.

Millions of innocent people throughout Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine have suffered because of Nuland’s bloody and disastrous foreign policies of intervention, coups, proxy wars, aggression, and occupation she’s promoted, all the while profiting from the investments of military contractors.

Nuland is evil and dangerous, and while her resignation ends a period of foreign policy influence, it may not mean she won’t play some role in US foreign policy, especially with husband, Robert Kagan’s Liberal Interventionist stance and staunch criticism of US foreign policies. 

Her hardline position against the Kremlin, and robust support of Ukraine and other Eastern European countries have contributed to escalating tensions between the US and Russia.

But is Nuland’s resignation a resignation or an admission by the Biden administration current strategy needs recalibrating?

If it is an admission by the US it needs to rethink its approach toward its relationship with Moscow - paving the way for a reset in U.S.-Russia relations, focusing on diplomacy rather than confrontation.

A change in rhetoric and strategy would de-escalate tensions and create a more stable international environment.

The Queen of Chicken Hawks approach to Russia, looking to undermine Vladimir Putin's regime, has been controversial.

Those who’ve advocated for a hardline stance argue its necessary to deter Russian aggression and support democratic movements within Russia and its neighbouring countries.

However, the narrative has always remained a lie the US has consistently run about Putin and Russia.

Putin has never suggested he wants to control Ukraine or overtake Europe.

As has consistently remained a constant, is how Americans and Europeans remain unaware and naively oblivious to the realities of the geopolitical landscape the US has fomented and proxy wars it has created.

Nuland is the consummate hypocrite.

Her duplicity is legendary - standing out for her double standards, condemning Russia for its alleged misinformation campaigns in the US while striving to exploit Putin's US invented vulnerabilities.

Her strategy included setting up military installations along NATO's eastern perimeter while intensifying the scale and visibility of joint military exercises.

Portrayed as the embodiment of aggressive foreign policy leadership, Nuland draws comparisons to Lady Macbeth in her relentless pursuit of war.

Despite the widespread harm attributed to the policies she supports; she remains untouched by the consequences of what she has manifested.

Through all the death and destruction she’s helped manifest, her wealth, has been enriched by investments in defence companies - flourishing because of the policies she’s created.

In 2000 when Putin first came power, he squeezed the oligarchs, made them pay taxes, restored order, and began rebuilding the economy.

In the first seven years of Putin at the helm, Russia’s GDP grew from $US1.3bn to $US2.3bn – explaining why Putin’s public approval remains consistently at the levels it does at 85% with his lowest approval rating of 65%.

Americans are oblivious to the realities. Instead, Putin and Russia continue to be demonised. Russia’s demonisation is a highly profitable narrative for the military-industrial complex.

The concept of attempting to undertake foreign regime change, especially one as powerful and entrenched as Putin's, has shown why it’s dangerous.

History’s shown why embarking on such madness brings with it unintended consequences.

In Russia’s case, pushing too hard against Putin is backfiring and now the world sits on the brink of a third world war, and civilisations final curtain call.

Nuland’s aim has been to provoke, threaten, and “wind back” Russia – a quick look at any map of US military bases shows it’s the US that is the threat.

The US’s desperation to enact regime change, use Ukraine as its proxy to wage a war that has seen more than 500,000 Ukrainians slaughtered in a war the US knew it could never win, now leads to an escalating military conflict.

The prospect of a direct military conflict between the US and Russia is a frightening scenario.

Recognising the risks, the Biden administration's potential shift in strategy is a pragmatic decision.

Nuland's resignation is significant for the US’s foreign policy position on Russia and a shift in strategy and rhetoric from the Biden administration.

The Queen of Chicken Hawk’s departure suggests the need for a new approach one that avoids regime change seeking a more stable and cooperative relationship with Russia.