Afrasianet -  Mounir Shafiq - You must be surprised when you hear the attack launched by the American administration against Russia because of the war it launched on Ukraine, and you may not believe your ears, your eyes or your mind.

Iraq and Afghanistan, and their occupation and abuse. You should be more surprised and astonished when you compare that logic with its position on all the wars of conquest and genocide launched by the Zionist entity against the Palestinian people and the Gaza Strip, Egypt 1956, Egypt, Syria and Jordan in 1967.

And it is even worse if you try to enumerate the wars that America launched in its history from the Philippines and a number of countries Latin America, down to Korea and Vietnam.

I was astonished by the number of more than 150 wars. The conclusion of every word that America attacks Russia today, you must remember that it applies to what it did against dozens of peoples of the world, and the sovereign states.

And you should get the same impression, when you hear what Britain says and does, not only in reviewing its colonial history, but also, in its support for all of America's wars, as it does now.

Of course, this applies to Western countries in general. But let's leave all this aside, and stop at the current Ukrainian crisis and the relationship of what America and Britain say about it, in particular, with regard to international law.

Considering what Russia is doing, it has done exactly, America, and to some extent, one hundred percent. America says that Russia has no right to object to NATO or Ukraine in the matter of its inclusion in NATO, considering that this is in line with international law, as each of the two countries has the right to conclude agreements between them, including military, and the transfer of weapons and missiles to their borders.

In 1962, the Soviet Union (Khrushchev) and Cuba (Castro) agreed to place Soviet missiles on Cuban soil.

This is based on what is permitted by international law, which gives two countries, two women, to conclude military agreements between them, and exchange weapons.

Here the rightness of the US administration flew during the era of the Democratic US President Kennedy, and he declared that this threatens US national security.

This is superior to any international law.

That is why the Soviet Union must retreat immediately.

Otherwise, America will destroy any barge that carries pieces of these missiles to Cuba (the sovereign state), even if this leads to the outbreak of a nuclear war that will not remain or shrivel up. He did not leave anyone in the world doubting his seriousness, which would not hesitate to ignite the Third World War. It was rumored at the time that one person said to another, “Tomorrow we will meet.”

He answered if there is a tomorrow. Here, Khrushchev retracted the decision to install missiles in Cuba in exchange for America's pledge not to invade and occupy Cuba. (It was revealed after 58 years that missiles planted in Turkey were also decided to be withdrawn).

In a word: what Russia is doing today is exactly what America did with the issue of Soviet missiles in Cuba. It is Ukraine not joining NATO and not planting missiles on Russia's borders, which unquestionably affects Russia's national security.

For this reason, America should have considered that the national security of the Russian state is in the foreground, and it is not allowed to harm it, to the extent that it is intolerable, otherwise the doors of war will be opened.

This is the custom that America and the West enacted at the time, and it has become the right of every country to practice it, if it is able to do so. This requires America to respect this custom.

And forget international law, when it comes to a serious threat to national security. Hence, America is responsible for forcing Russia to wage war. That was when it continued to encircle it with NATO countries through Eastern European countries, or the former Soviet Union countries, especially the latter, and especially Ukraine in particular.

The advantage of international law is that it is a right for everyone, to the same extent, even if it was the Western countries that persisted in violating it. And began to transgress and interfere in the internal affairs of other sovereign states.

The custom that America has enshrined does not allow it to consider it an exclusive right. And then, by what right does it come today to put the world in danger, which may go beyond the borders of Ukraine, if Russia's national security is ignored, or Al-Raisi is not responded to?

That is why the Kyiv government must be wise, and go to compromise with Russia, to find a solution that will bring Ukraine, Europe, and the world out of danger.

Then Ukraine should remember two historical facts, namely that Russian lands, other than the Crimea, were given to Ukraine, to become an important country, in the Soviet period (since the era of Stalin).

This requires Ukraine to remain a friend, and not turn into the opposite, at least, and be used to threaten Russian national security.

This dimension must be reckoned with, albeit from a literary point of view. America, Britain and some of the West believe that it is in their interest to embroil Russia in a protracted Russo-Ukrainian war of attrition.

They believe that Russia has not prepared an understanding with China in the face of sanctions, embargo and economic losses. This was confirmed seven days ago of the war; As proven by facts, and not, according to prior estimates, or safety.

The course of this war, so far, indicates that Putin is the one who takes the lead, whether from a military point of view, or in terms of confronting the economic situation, and the extent of the effectiveness of the sanctions on the course of the war.

Of course, the first loser so far is the Ukrainian people, and the Kyiv government, which is waiting for instructions from abroad. The other losers are later, not now.

In short, we, the Palestinians, the Arabs, the Muslims, and the free people of the world: Where does America stand? We must stand against it, and whoever is not convinced, let him review history.