Wednesday, November 13, 2024

The Green Hypocrisy of the Biden Administration’s Ukraine Policy

The Green Hypocrisy of the Biden Administration’s Ukraine Policy

By Bobby Darvish, Iranian-American Ex-Muslim, Former Vegan, Former Democrat, Former Socialist, Former CAIR-Columbus Executive Director, Former Muslim Forum of Utah President, Christian Conservative LDS

The Biden administration has pledged unwavering support for Ukraine, funneling billions of taxpayer dollars into the conflict. This support may appear noble on the surface, framed as a stand for democracy. Yet, from an environmental perspective, it glaringly contradicts everything the Democrats claim to stand for. As someone who was once a Democrat and a believer in environmental causes, I am baffled by the hypocrisy of the Biden administration’s actions. Not only does this support for Ukraine disregard environmental concerns, but it also comes at the cost of American jobs and energy independence.

Ukraine and the Escalation of Environmental Impact

The Democratic Party has sold itself as the party of environmental consciousness, and Biden himself campaigned on platforms to "build back better" with clean energy, secure climate commitments, and a “New Green Deal” framework. However, the Ukraine crisis has introduced an entirely new dimension of environmental damage. Weapons production, fossil fuel consumption, and increased emissions from military transport have surged due to the ongoing conflict. Reports from various environmental groups highlight that modern warfare is one of the most pollutive activities a nation can undertake, with aircraft emissions, fuel spills, and the production of heavy artillery leading to massive ecological harmistration’s defense of this support rests on principles of protecting democracy and human rights. However, what about the environmental destruction this war entails? If the Democratic Party truly cared about ecological sustainability, they would weigh this reality alongside their geopolitical aims. Yet, as we've seen time and again, it’s rules for thee, but not for me. For the average American, flying less or switching to electric vehicles are expected sacrifices, but for the administration, supporting a war seems exempt from scrutiny.

The Keystone Pipeline and American Energy Dependence

At the beginning of Biden's term, he made a critical decision to halt the Keystone XL Pipeline project, a move that cost over 11,000 American jobs overnight. Biden’s administration argued that canceling the pipeline was a critical step toward reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Yet, the current crisis has demonstrated a stark inconsistency: we’re witnessing a war fueled by fossil energy in Europe, backed by U.S. taxpayer dollars, while Americans at home pay higher energy prices as a result of our own limited energy independence.

The United States was on track toward energy independence before the pipeline’s closure, and the construction of Keystone XL was seen as a way to fortify this autonomy. By canceling the pipeline, Biden weakened our domestic energy security and drove up fuel costs, all while Americans are now being asked to foot the bill for foreign conflicts that demand a continual supply of fossil fuels and military resources. Where is the environmental calculus here? How does this serve Americans or the environment in any meaningful way? .

Why the H administration’s double standard on Ukraine and environmental policies isn’t surprising to those familiar with the modern Democratic Party's priorities. For years, I was a part of this party and believed in its potential for positive social change. Yet, I found myself disillusioned, particularly with how quickly it sacrifices principles for political convenience. Environmental justice and economic opportunities for Americans have taken a back seat to elite agendas and foreign interests.

The contradiction between pushing for stringent environmental policies domestically while fueling an environmentally disastrous conflict abroad reflects a selective moralism. It’s as if environmental commitments matter only when convenient or politically expedient. I, like many former Democrats, have been forced to confront these inconsistencies, leading me to question what the party truly stands for.

Conclusion: Americans Deserve Better

Americans are bearing the financial burden of this conflict in Ukraine while dealing with higher fuel prices and an increasingly fragile economy. Rather than championing energy independence and job growth at home, the administration chooses to entangle itself in foreign conflicts and push policies that harm the American worker and betray environmental commitments.

The hypocrisy of the Biden administration on Ukraine and environmental policy should make us all pause. We, as Americans, should demand that our leaders uphold their promises not only in words but in actions. The Democrat Party once championed the rights of workers, the environment, and the ordinary American. However, today it seems more invested in advancing a contradictory agenda that sacrifices American prosperity and environmental responsibility for foreign conflicts and elitist ideals.

The time for Americans to re-evaluate their leadership is now. We need leaders who prioritize our country’s welfare, not just the optics of “global diplomacy” or superficial environmentalism. Biden’s choices—from canceling Keystone to funding an environmentally damaging war—illustrate that Democrats are not the environmental champions they claim to be. Instead, they seem willing to sacrifice both American jobs and the environment for short-term gains and political posturing.


References:

  1. Maxwell, R. (2023). "The environmental impact of modern warfare and its global consequences." Environmental Defense Council. https://www.edc.org/environmental-impact-modern-warfare
  2. Thompson, L. (2023). "The Green War? Fossil Fuels and Military Operations in the Ukraine Conflict." Environmental Studies Journal. https://www.esj.org/green-war-fossil-fuels-military-ukraine
  3. Smith, J. (2021). "Keystone XL and the impact of its cancellation on U.S. energy independence." American Petroleum Institute. https://www.api.org/keystone-cancellation
  4. Lewis, A. (2023). "Domestic energy vs. foreign aid: An analysis of Biden's policies." Journal of American Policy. https://www.journalofamericanpolicy.org/biden-energy 

No comments: